Lessons from Teach for America Alumni: A Review of In the Deep Heart's Core, by Michael Johnston; Lessons to Learn: Voices from the Front Lines of Teach for America, by Molly Ness; Taught by America: A Story of Struggle and Hope in Compton, by Sarah Sentilles

Abstract

Notes

¹11% of the senior class at Notre Dame and Amherst, and 8% of seniors at Princeton and Harvard also applied to be TFA teachers (see http://www.teachforamerica.org/documents/060106_2006.Application.Numbers.pdf for more statistics).

²We are particularly interested in the debate because we are both former TFA corps members (Megan Blumenreich, Compton, 1990; Lori Rhodes, Los Angeles, 1994).

³In the latest installment of the scholarly debate regarding the effectiveness of alternative credentialing, “professionalization advocates” Darling-Hammond, Holtzman, Gatlin, & Heilig, (2005) replicate and build on the work of the “deregulationist” Hoover Institution's 2001 CREDO center study. In the CREDO report, Raymond, Fletcher, and Luque (2001) examine the effect of TFA teachers on student achievement on standardized performance tests in Houston, for grades 3–8 between 1996 and 2000. The study's authors concluded that positive links could be found between TFA teachers and their students' math test scores. In addition, in a comparison drawn between all new teachers recruited during the same years of the study, it was revealed “that TFA teachers were more likely to hold a Bachelor's degree, were placed in more difficult classes, and were less likely to leave after the first year” (p. xi). Darling-Hammond, Holtzman, Gatlin, & Heilig, however, contend the CREDO study is deficient in that it compared TFA teachers with an “extraordinarily unqualified pool of teachers” (p. 4) and did not specifically compare the effectiveness of TFA teachers to the traditionally prepared teachers in Houston.

A strength of the study by Darling-Hammond et al. is that in addition for coding the non-TFA Houston teachers for their diversity in credentialing or alternative credentialing, they also code for the complexity of TFA experiences in the certification process. In addition, the study codes and controls for the students' prior learning. The authors explain the value in this research method: “Several studies have sought to examine the effectiveness of TFA recruits, but none has explicitly compared the effectiveness of differently prepared or certified recruits using appropriate controls for students' prior learning” (2005, p. 2). After examining data from 271,015 students and 15,344 teachers, Darling-Hammond et al. found that both uncertified TFA teachers and non-TFA uncertified teachers “exert negative effects on student achievement relative to teachers with certification” (p. 17). Meanwhile, TFA teachers with certification did significantly better than those non-TFA teachers with standard certification on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) in mathematics (standardized math tests). The authors conclude that “the effects of TFA teachers on achievement appear to depend, as they do for other teachers, primarily on the level of preparation these teachers have had, as reflected in their certification status” (p.22).

Although this study appears to support the value of TFA corps members who earn teaching credentials, the authors quickly point out that once TFA teachers complete their credentials they usually leave Houston. The authors explain that between 57–90% of TFA recruits left teaching in Houston after their second year, and between 72–100% had left after their third year. These numbers support the commonly held belief that many TFA corps members leave their sites upon completion of their two-year commitment, thus costing the districts more money to replace them in the long run. However, this idea of retention of TFA teachers is a complicated one and seems to be quite unclear in the literature. According to Wendy Kopp, the founder of TFA, in the year 2000, over 90% of corps members completed their commitment, and almost 60% of alumni are still working full-time in education (2000).

The Darling-Hammond et al. study has garnered much response in the media, most of which focused on its research methodology and the accuracy of its results (Goldhaber, 2005; Smith, 2005; Podgursky, 2005). Criticism focuses on the fact that the study compares TFA corps members to other teachers across the system rather than with teachers specifically in their schools as well as the fact that the sample sizes for each analysis are either not reported or appear to be so small they may be inconsequential in terms of large scale policy reform. Critics feel the Darling-Hammond et al. study reaches incorrect conclusions and should not determine policy for alternative credentialing programs and recruiting programs such as TFA.

⁴In research not yet published by the authors, when twenty-four TFA alumni who have earned a masters degree in education and have remained in the teaching profession were asked what was the most important motivator for joining TFA in the first place, a desire to contribute to the achievement of social justice in poor and underserved regions was the leading response.

⁵Although Ness mentions the critics' views of TFA in her attempt to provide a balanced analysis, her documentation of the program's successes far outreach the failures. For instance, Ness writes about specific TFA members' successes and cites examples of TFA teachers overcoming adversity to raise test scores, using high expectations to support the move of children classified in special education classrooms to mainstream classrooms, and reaching out to students' caregivers. In a brief summary, she does note that there are some skeptics of the corps members' ability to succeed and refers to Laczcko-Kerr & Berliner's (2002) study which found that students of uncertified teachers showed 20% less academic growth on standardized tests than those of their traditionally trained counterparts. Unfortunately, however, Ness does not offer a discussion of these differing viewpoints.

⁶This deficiency indicates more general problems in Ness's research methods. The stories collected by Ness are compelling and offer insight into the experiences of the first-year uncredentialed teacher, of which there are thousands nationwide; however, to claim these “stories” represent an objective account of TFA is problematic. Whereas Ness is careful to counter the inspiring tales with sporadic stories of those who struggled and felt inadequate when unable to accomplish miracles during their first year in the classroom, she does not realize that she might have found examples of traditionally trained teachers who also institute excellent programs in their school. In addition, according to Ness 15% of corps members regularly do not complete the TFA program, yet only one such corps member is interviewed for this book. In a comprehensive description of the program, the experiences of those who quit would surely be insightful and benefit a “critical examination” of the program. The reader is left wondering how she selected which stories to share and whether the stories presented are representative or illustrative of patterns Ness found in her analysis of all of the data collected. Ultimately, Lessons to Learn neglects to take into consideration the larger context and history of education as well as the potential long-term effects of TFA on students and the teaching profession.

Hartocollis, A. (2005) Who needs education schools? New York Times, Education Life, Section 4A, Sunday July 31.