Doomed To Fail
Reader comment on: In Book, Teaching Fellows Dropout Points to Inadequate Preparation

Submitted by Ed Dunne, Sep 17, 2007 10:40

Doomed to Fail

Having taught "at risk" high school students for 35 years in New York City public high schools, I can understand Mr. Brown's reasons for quitting. Ever since the old Board of Examiners were abolished in the early 1970's teacher preparation was relegated to on the job training. As a result, new teachers entered the classroom with little or no real world preparation.

Today it's rare for a new teacher to have the credentials and preparation that was required by the old Board of Examiners to even sit for a licensing exam. Having a college degree and knowing your subject area is necessary but not sufficient to become a good teacher. Like any other profession, you need to know the "tricks of the trade" before becoming proficient.

There is an old saying in law school that goes, "First you get your law degree and than you learn how to practice law." Can you imagine any quality law firm allowing a recent law school graduate to try a case alone just after graduating law school? I can't. So why do we let anybody with a BA teach our children, our most important societal asset, with little or no mentored experience?

The DOE's claim that proper preparation of new teachers is too expensive is unacceptable. If they can find the private money to hire public relation experts at $30,000 a month to help Joel Klein to be less anal retentive, than they can come up with the wherewithal to help new teachers teach. After all, the DOE has a privately funded Principal's Institute. Why not one for new teachers?

When the DOE takes teacher preparation seriously, then and only then will our children learn because of our efforts and not in spite of them.

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