I want to preface the following scathing admonition with the fact that I believe Teach for America does have many benefits for individuals like me who were drawn to the program by a largely unfounded idealism. Benefits include an insertion into the lives of impoverished students, which many are unprepared for (like me), but one that leads to intense humility and gratefulness, which is good. Exploring a new area of the country is also nice. Finally, you get sweet deals on tuition for Master's programs (but only in Education).
There are other benefits to being a Teach for America corps member, but I'm going to stop there because that is not the goal of Teach for America–or this blog for that matter.
TFA's motto is this utopian mantra, "One day, all children in this nation will have the opportunity to attain an excellent education."
It is worthy, obviously, but oh-so-lofty. Not that a powerful organization such as Teach for America shouldn't have such an optimistic aim, but they should perhaps reconsider how they go about achieving it, because under the current system, that motto is ridiculously far-fetched.
An excellent education implies excellent teachers, which is not what Teach for America produces, both short-term and most definitely long-term. This point is an oft-cited criticism of the program (see:
"After five years, 27.8% [of TFA teachers] were still in teaching. This retention rate is markedly lower than the 50% estimated for new teachers across all types of schools.")
When I joined TFA in late June, I was frankly very nervous about the forthcoming six-week "intensive training program." I thought it would be challenging in ways that I had never experienced. I thought this because how could five or more years of collegiate-level education that is crammed into six weeks not be challenging?
But it wasn't. At least not in the ways that I had expected. It was led by people who had spent as few as two years teaching, making them wildly unqualified to teach us. It was endless sessions talking broadly about diversity and community. It was group discussions on fluffy topics that were strangely monitored by the leaders with clipboards, as if recording our every word was tantamount to our development as teachers. It was hours wasted entering data, precious data, into TFA's tracking system.
Olivia Blanchard, who writes well, was a member of Teach for America before quitting. She pens her own anecdote about the near-pointless training:
I assumed that I would learn the concrete steps I needed to achieve this transformation during the training program. Instead I was immersed in a sea of jargon, buzzwords, and touchy-feely exercises. One memorable session began with directions for us to mentally “become” two of our students. After an elaborate, 32-slide reflection guide, we were asked to close the session with a “Vision Collage,” for which we were handed pre-scripted reflections. “One person will volunteer to read his/her line first. After one person reads aloud, another should jump in, so that one response immediately follows another—without any pauses.” At this stage in training, most of us were still struggling to grasp the basics of lesson planning.
-Olivia Blanchard, former TFA corps member
In the final week of training the organization lost the final fiber of my respect. They manipulated the data to make the organization look good, and perhaps to make me feel like I had accomplished something as a teacher (I hadn't).
Here's how they did it.
On my first day of teaching, the leaders had me give a 'pre-test' to my students (who, naturally, weren't thrilled to be in summer school and certainly weren't thrilled to be taking a long test on the first day). It was also the first day in my life that I had stepped to the front of a room in an attempt to teach. The pre-test went as I'm sure Teach for America wanted it to–dreadfully, with many students not completing half of it. And I didn't have much time to think about how ludicrous it was to give a test on that first day–I was too busy being swept away by 12- and 14-hour days of mostly mindless talk.
Then, on the last day of my summer school teaching, we were to give that pre-test again, this time as a final assessment. I wasn't much better as a teacher by then, but I had perhaps improved a tad since that first day. Also, some of the students believed that their performance on that final test would determine if they moved on to the next grade, so it's not hard to understand why that second test went exponentially better, with most kids completing it.
I dutifully entered the test data into the TFA system. The system compared the results of the pre- and post-tests, and I was unsurprised to see a huge jump in scores. That jump had virtually nothing to do with anything that I had attempted to teach over the course of those six weeks. Nothing. I had spent most days trying in vain to get their attention–I hadn't taught them to comprehend written English any better.
But the lead-leader at my school came over to me to check the assessment data. And when he saw the improvement, he went apeshit.
"Max, this is so great! Look at that! You had a hugely positive effect on those students!"
Bullshit I did. In that moment, as lead-leader continued praising me for my hard work and "accomplishment," I wanted to quit. That data was entirely fabricated, and it was done to further uphold that the program is able to adequately prepare teachers in six weeks, when in reality that is perfect nonsense.
In another article, a former manager at Teach for America explains why she quit. She talks about how the program is more concerned with its image than with educating its members and our students, and I would have to agree with her.
During my tenure on staff, we even got a national team, the communications team, whose job it was to get positive press out about Teach For America in our region and to help us quickly and swiftly address any negative stories, press or media. This inability and unwillingness to honestly address valid criticism made me start to see that Teach For America had turned into more of a public relations campaign than an organization truly committed to closing the achievement gap. Unfortunately, the organization seemed to care more about public perception of what the organization was doing than about what the organization was actually doing to improve education for low-income students throughout the United States.
-Wendy Chovnick, former Managing Director, Strategy, Talent and Operations of TFA Phoenix
But even if I had TFA at my beck and call, I wouldn't be adequately prepared for teaching at my current school. And although I don't think anyone can be adequately prepared for teaching until they do it, I think that Teach for America promotes its members' data to make it seem like they are helping rather than hurting the fiasco that is education in many parts of the country.
And some school districts are finally catching on, as the Pittsburgh school board recently dropped its contract with Teach for America, marking the first time any board has "reversed itself on bringing in TFA corps members into a district."
It's been hard for me to write this, not because I'm a member of the program, but because I now have to live with the fear of a TFA hitman lurking behind every corner and within every shadow. (Had to slip in a joke.)
But seriously, until the organization accepts its many flaws, it will continue to be harshly and rightfully criticized, and we'll see more school boards act as Pittsburgh's did.