Since the publication of Zoe Lescaze's article on Teach for America ("Rise in TFA applicants at Bowdoin, nationwide," March 27), a number of students have asked me why I hate TFA. Each time I emphatically respond that I don't hate Teach for America, but that I probably should. And here's why...
Unlike organizations, such as the Friedman Foundation, which claim to improve "the quality of elementary and secondary education" in the United States yet actively erode support for public schooling, Teach for America is a strong proponent of public education. As someone who believes that public institutions are central to the maintenance of a vibrant democratic republic, I appreciate TFA's commitment to public schooling. In an increasingly commodified and privatized society, it is important that organizations such as TFA counter the proposals issued by ideologically motivated, market-driven school reformers.
TFA, furthermore, states that its central mission is to eliminate the persistent educational inequities resulting from inequality in American society. In a nation where public school student enrollments frequently mirror the stark demographic realities of racially, ethnically, and socio-economically segregated communities, I greatly respect TFA's refusal to ignore the significant educational disadvantage that children from impoverished communities—both rural and urban—suffer when compared to their suburban peers.
For these reasons and others, I am committed to working closely with Bowdoin students when they inform me that they hope to join TFA. Given the gravity of their occupational plans, I immediately urge them to prepare for the work with the heightened level of seriousness and intensity with which they would approach any consequential undertaking. Many take my advice and enroll in Bowdoin courses requiring hundreds of hours observing and practice-teaching in public school classrooms while learning the instructional methods and curriculum development skills necessary to succeed as a classroom teacher. According to TFA, however, such undergraduate preparation for the realities of the public school classroom is unnecessary.
It is primarily for this reason that I probably should hate TFA.
The unfortunate number of ineffective elementary and secondary school teachers (whose classes most of us have suffered through at least once) attests to the genuinely complex and challenging nature of teachers' work. Indeed, even at Bowdoin College, an institution that typically enrolls prepared, engaged, and enthusiastic students, I frequently discuss with other professors the difficulties associated with planning and teaching in effective ways. Yet TFA's model of providing only minimal "training" to college graduates (many who have never taught a single lesson in an elementary or secondary school classroom) is counterintuitive in assuming that its "corps members" will succeed in their first year as teachers in some of our nation's most challenging educational environments.
Of course, whether the result of raw talent, sharp intuition, or some other difficult-to-identify personal characteristic, some TFA teachers do succeed. Many, however, struggle with the demands of their position. Overwhelmed by a lack of experience with disadvantaged students' academic, social, and emotional needs, they strive just to keep their own motivation from slipping away. Some of those TFA participants drop out of the program during the school year, leaving their students at an even greater disadvantage than before. And TFA recruits who complete their two-year term of service frequently observe that they learned more from their students than their students learned from them—a claim I imagine their students' parents would not be pleased to hear.
TFA placed 3,700 corps members in schools this past year. With approximately 3 million public school teachers working in almost 15,000 school districts in the United States, TFA recruits amounted to .12 percent of the nation's public school teacher workforce. This is an obviously insignificant contribution.
Nevertheless, Teach for America has attracted a great deal of attention as well as private financing (last year, for instance, TFA spent almost $30,000 on marketing for each recruit it placed in a public school classroom—approximately the same as a Maine teacher's starting salary). With such a high profile, TFA has demonstrated its potential for influencing policy development, which is why I value the organization's dedication to addressing the problem of educational inequity. Indeed, its commitment is one that I wish we all would share.
Bowdoin students, especially, might consider putting their tremendous talents to use in an effort to end inequality in America, including by becoming public school teachers. In their zeal to join "the movement" to end educational inequity, however, students should not be duped by TFA's marketing schemes into believing that academic achievement as a student on one side of the desk necessarily translates into success as a teacher on the other.
I have worked as a teacher and teacher educator in and around public schools for 20 years. During all of that time, I have never met anyone who believed that he or she would not have benefitted from more rigorous preparation prior to becoming a classroom teacher. I doubt I ever will.
Charles Dorn is an associate professor of education.