By JESSE SCACCIA
Here is what she said:
“The dirty little secret about schools of education is that they have been the cash cows of universities for many, many years, and it’s time to say, ‘Show us what you can do, or get out of the business.’”
Want to know the best part? Not only is Katherine Merseth a professor at Harvard, she is a senior lecturer and director of the teacher education program there. So it’s not like it’s some outsider making this damning statement about our ed schools. It is an insider, a vital part of the machinery.
How bad does Merseth think things are? Of the some 1,300 teacher education programs in America, Merseth thinks that all of 100 are adueqately preparing teachers.
As for the rest? Shut them down tomorrow, for all she cares. The rest of the U.S. News & World Report article is here.
It’s funny, as I was walking here to the coffee shop I was thinking about schools of education. What’s wrong with them? Shouldn’t three or four (or five or six, in many cases) years be enough time to prepare any able-minded person how to do anything?
My instinct tells me a big part of the problem is that schools of education waste far too much time on theory and social psychology at the expense of direct, subject specific strategies. I went to one of the most prestigious schools of education in the country–the University of Connecticut’s NEAG program, which is consistently ranked as the best public program in New England. I could be wrong, but I believe in my three years in the program I had exactly one class specifically directed toward teaching high school English. And of course, that class was taught by an academic, a woman who hadn’t been in a real classroom for years.
Another problem is the magazine where this article came from, U.S. News & World Report. They’re the ones that come up with those famous college rankings. We all know that with those rankings come prestige, and with prestige comes raises, promotions, and more funding. So schools of education gear their programs to raise their scores within the criteria of those rankings. The problem is, U.S. News & World Report, a freaking magazine, is the one setting the criteria for the rankings!
How did we get to a place where some magazine hijacked our teacher education system?!
I’m going to email the U.S. News & World Report people now. Hopefully I’ll have an interview for us soon.
I went to Northwestern’s MSED program which can be completed in one year or in several years on a part time basis. Most of our teachers were adjuncts who also taught in classrooms or had recently retired from teaching in classrooms. Their experiences really helped inform my practice.
I am an English teacher, and we had both a reading methods course and a writing methods course taught by a current middle school teacher who also publishes books. We also took a reading across the curriculum course that was incredibly practical and taught such skills as textbook review and selection. Recent graduates were frequently our TAs for classes and provided insight into being a new teacher.
I cannot say enough about how terrific of a program NU’s is. It’s expensive, but worth it.
The only problem I’ve had entering the profession is dealing with teachers who were trained long ago and haven’t changed their practice in years or those teachers who only want to do what was done to them. The quest for innovation shouldn’t be a burden.
Thanks for your thoughts, Gabrielle. I’d assume Northwestern’s program would be in that top percentage of programs worth saving.
Unfortunately, many prospective teachers are teachers’ kids, so a great school like Northwestern isn’t financially an option. Do you see any reason why a lesser-funded public school couldn’t have as good of a program as NU?