I agree...all teachers should be prepared to teach before they enter the classroom.
Reader comment on: Uncertified Teachers Performing Well, Study Finds
in response to reader comment: The logic astounds me.

Submitted by Bridget Looney, Nov 20, 2006 21:48

Student teaching is the most important part of teacher training. I never would have survived a week in a classroom without first having someone to watch. That's where a teacher learns, among other things, classroom management, organizational systems and appropriate ways to communicate with children. Teachers who become certified via the alternative routes do not, from what I understand, do student teaching. Learning to design curriculum, plan lessons, and differentiate for the needs of all the learning styles and exceptional children one encounters are equally important, but can be learned through coursework during the first years of teaching. It's not ideal, but it's possible. How anyone could possibly have the time or energy to take courses during their first three years of teaching is the big question. I've been teaching for nine years and work straight through until 10pm some days because there's just that much involved in being prepared for the next day. At least three days a week I stay until 6 preparing my classroom and materials for the next days' lessons and then take home student work to review. I decided to go back for a second master's and have been taking one course a semester for the past year. I'm a young, athletic person and it's killing me.

Like Tine Sloan, I don't see how a 'faster rate of improvement' merits putting an untrained teacher in a classroom. What a waste of time for both the students and the teacher. Also, I can imagine teachers would become discouraged and burn out more quickly that way. When you're not doing a good job it's clear to everyone, especially you, and who would want to feel like a failure--even if someone's feeding you the propaganda that you're "making a difference."

I've been critical of the alternative routes in principle, anyway. They undermine efforts by educators to have teaching seen as a profession. What profession doesn't require time served as an intern or apprentice? Teachers should be trained following the same model that the medical profession uses. Apprentice teachers should be closely supervised and mentored for three to four years before being considered lead teachers. What it comes down to is no one wants to pay teachers what they're worth when they do their job properly. In the end, the alternative route is just a way to keep churning out teachers so there can be a warm, legal body in every classroom. Easy to train, easy to replace. And it's the kids who suffer.

And by the way, this article made some very broad statements that cannot be supported by research--such as 'it doesn't seem to matter what college you went to and how well you did.' There's research that shows just the opposite. Good grades and a good pedigree don't guarantee anything, but they're generally valued for a reason. Who's this author trying to kid? In fact, who bribed him to write this article? The Bloomberg administration?

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.