Tuesday, August 5, 2014
The disconnect between what Vitti thinks is good for our schools and what principals know is good.
From the Times Union when discussing the QEA initiative: For instance, Vitti said about 100 Teach for America teachers will be stationed in Raines, Ribault and Jackson feeder schools, mostly teaching middle and high school math or science.
Teach for America is nationally known for steering Ivy League college grads to teach in urban schools.
That Ivy League thing is incorrect by the way as TFA now draws from most major colleges. Regardless Vitti’s love for TFA is not supported by evidence. I can’t imagine a parent picking a TFA recruit over an experienced teacher. Furthermore the QEA’s big selling point is to get our most experienced and best teachers with our lowest performing students. TFA does the exact opposite of what we know to be the best for them.
The following is from an assistant principal in the same article: Carrie M. Warren, an assistant principal at Rufus A. Payne Elementary, said more experienced teachers at her school will mean her academically advanced students will get more attention. Until now, she said, the school’s staff has been able to focus mostly on struggling students.
“Now we’ll have a lot of senior teachers, with 10-plus years’ experience, who have taught students at different levels and who’ll know how to pull from their bag of tricks,” she said.
10 plus years of experience, wow, a stark difference from the TFA teachers without education degrees and just a five-week access course under their belts. You see experienced teachers have a bag of tricks where rookie teachers are often in survival mode. The thing is rookie teachers get better, TFA teachers stay for two years and just when they are beginning to get it they leave to be replaced by another rookie crop.