News alert: The people entering the teaching profession are less proficient than their older counterparts and they are the ones that carry the mantle of education America’s youth.
In education, there are two checkpoints during a new teacher’s journey towards earning a teaching license: entering a university credential program and passing a year of student teaching.
If during this process either of these two checkpoints fail to weed out weak candidates, credentials will be handed out, a golden ticket to gaining lifetime employment in a school.
That’s why it is essential that the requirements remain high to ensure that children receive a quality education.
The California State University system is the largest of its kind in issuing teaching credentials. Part of the requirements used to determine eligibility for a credential program is a college student’s grade point average or GPA. The long-standing benchmark used to be a minimum 3.0 or ‘B’ average. In recent years, however, 16 of the 22 CSU campuses have lowered the GPA: six use 2.75 or 2.67 (B-), eight use 2.5 (C+) and one uses a 2.0 (C).
Evidently, not enough smart people are choosing teaching as a career so somehow the credential-issuing mechanisms have to come up with ways to allow subpar people to fill classroom positions. It’s a paradox that those who don’t excel at academic achievement choose a job that requires teaching young people to excel academically.
Once weaker candidates gain entrance into the program, the final step is to teach a few classes in a real classroom with a mentor teacher present. If the candidates earn passing scores on evaluation forms, they walk away with a license to teach.
Sadly, some that accept the role of mentor are not the best in the business. Often a school-wide email goes out asking for volunteers. While some effective teachers willingly sign up, too many other ineffective ones look at mentoring as a way to lessen their workload. Instead, universities should be aggressively recruiting high quality mentors which means paying them more than $150 per semester.
The evaluation forms themselves are problematic. A candidate is evaluated based on dozens of teacher behaviors using a three-point scale: exceeds, meets or below standards. As long as a student teacher has no more than five “below” standards, that candidate receives a credential. Shouldn’t that candidate earn five “above” standards to even the score?
Think about the uproar if in the medical field, surgeons who barely passed were those who instructed interns on the finer details of surgery.
In addition to the mentor teacher’s evaluation, universities use former teachers and administrators to observe and evaluate as well. However, these field supervisors only watch a handful of lessons compared to the nearly 90 viewed by the mentor teacher. That is why it’s critical to ensure that mentor teachers are the best in the business: they are the last bulwark against ineffective teachers populating classrooms.