Rhetorical Warfare

Last week I posed the question, “What makes a teacher highly qualified?” The answer seems simple enough...someone with the proper background education and certifications, who continues their growth and enrichment of the profession. For teachers the answer is simple, highly qualified is reserved for professionals who have mastered their art. Like any career profession someone who is highly qualified in his/her craft have been 1) doing it for a long time and 2) built an expansive resume of certifications, credentials experience and knowledge.

Simple enough, right? Not so for our policy counterparts in Rayburn and Dirksen. Capitol Hill is struggling to understand and define these two simple words, “Highly Qualified.”

A little history…

When No Child Left Behind became effective in January 2002 it required all American public school classrooms to have a teacher who is “highly qualified.” This requirement was to be fully executed by the end of the 2005-06 school year. Seems easy, right? It makes sense, to have all students proficient in reading and math they must benefit from highly trained and qualified educators. Minor problem…how do we (NCLB drafters) define those two words? What do we focus on? The number of years in school, like medical residencies? Or rather, the program a person graduates from and their GPA, like law school? Does a teacher automatically gain the title upon the completion of a certain amount of years in teaching? Is it a certain number of proficient teacher evaluations?

I did some rummaging through the handy-dandy World Wide Web and came across the Secretary of Education, Rod Paige’s 2002 Annual Report, focusing on Highly Qualified Teachers. Paige explained highly qualified teachers as:

“As part of the new law, Congress defines highly qualified teachers as those who not only possess full state certification but also have solid content knowledge of the subjects they teach. For example, beginning Fall 2002, all new elementary school teachers will have to pass tests in subject knowledge and teaching skills in math, reading and writing, while new middle and high school teachers must pass rigorous subject-matter tests or have the equivalent of an undergraduate major, graduate degree or advanced certification in their respective fields. As this report details, research suggests teachers with strong academic backgrounds in their subjects are more likely to boost student performance.”

That makes sense, so what’s the big deal on the Hill? Why are we even having this discussion? It is safe to say that all teachers would agree with this requirement. It helps to set rigorous standards to weed out the weak or those not truly invested. 

A little more history…

One of the biggest questions raised from the definition of “highly qualified” was whether an alternative certification program meets the standard. The Bush administration essentially said yes and issued a regulation making it so. Thus, Congress approved language in a spending bill that would ultimately allow teachers in alternative certification programs to count as “highly qualified” as long as they were working toward certification and part of a recognized program (such as TFA). This provision was set to expire at the end of the 2012-13 school year. The big issue for many education groups is the extension of this clause, which organizations, such as TFA, want to lengthen (the House of Representatives did, extending it for 2 more years).

I was a Teach For America Corps Member. I am forever grateful that this program offered me a way to teach in an urban classroom and obtain a cost-effective credential at a prestigious school. I was attracted to its ability to make the teaching profession rigorous and selective. I liked the idea of being one of the “chosen few” that had the “privilege” and opportunity to make a social impact in my local community. In my school there were far too many vacancies and not enough “highly qualified” teachers. In fact, we had a sizable portion of staff that were long-term subs or in alternative certification programs too. Teach for America cultivated my resilience and perseverance. It gave me front-line experience that not many teachers, even traditionally educated, can obtain. I believe in the mission of TFA and its desire to positively improve the public education infrastructure.

However, to say I was a “highly qualified” teacher in my first (or even second) year of teaching is ridiculous. I, the corps member, will openly admit that my first year class of kids did not benefit from my teaching abilities. They benefited from my ability to build relationships and work relentlessly to produce success on some level. They benefited from a teacher who was committed for an entire year and who was working towards a credential. None of these things however, truly capture the science of teaching. I had no idea how to approach special education. I was not equipped for behavior management or reading recovery. I was inept on so many levels and refuse to take the title of “highly qualified.” I was about as qualified for teaching as I was for heart surgery. The hands-on experience and real-life practice has made me a better practitioner in teaching. Even now, 5 years deep, I still question if I am “highly qualified.”

Do I think alternative certification teachers should be labeled as highly qualified? No. Do I think that should keep them from teaching in a high needs area if the only other option is a substitute? No again. My belief is this, if I was the only good and stable option for my kids, then great! I am the most qualified for that situation. I am not a competitor of a traditionally trained educator I am a supplement when there is only lesser options. There is a difference between a doctor and a resident. The titles represent level of training. It is impractical and detrimental to compare the two as though they are on the same level professionally.

This is where I disagree with TFA and many other organizations and policymakers. In an action alert this was stated:

“The most rigorous independent studies have demonstrated that Teach For America corps members outperform non- Teach For America teachers (including veteran teachers) in multiple subjects and grade levels.”

Correction, if it weren’t for those “non” TFA teachers I wouldn’t be a successful educator today. My ability to impact change and achieve significant gains came from the community of educators around me who were more experienced and effective, sharing their resources. I have a fundamental problem with this fight and you should too. This is not about providing children with the best teacher, it’s about rhetoric, and in the end it becomes an “us” against “them” battle. For me, those are fighting words. A highly qualified teacher is one who has spent years perfecting their craft and working personally and professionally to reflect and improve. Unfortunately an alternatively certified teacher does not have those qualities and expertise, and I refuse to group myself with that level of experience and commitment. TFA and organizations alike shouldn’t be competing they should be supplementing and supporting.

I know it’s easy for me to say now that I’ve done TFA and never faced that adversity, but entrusting me with a classroom after 5 weeks of training not only did a disservice to me as an educator but to the community I was serving too. If it weren’t for my highly qualified counterparts I wouldn’t have learned the way of the land and developed the expertise I now have.

I would implore you to take a stand in this. I know everyone won’t agree with my view and I am okay with that. It’s imperative that you figure out what the facts are and decide what you believe in, because this is will impact the nature of education in the future to come. At the end of the day I am a Finnish-at-heart. Instead of looking to competition as the catalyst for change, we need to adopt a philosophy of collaboration and abandon this “highly qualified” nonsense. Then, we would actually be focusing on creating an army of career professionals who only gain a title of “highly qualified” when they’ve mastered their craft. I encourage your opinions and perspectives.