This is another in an occasional series of posts here on The Education Blog where I highlight an article or paper that examines some fundamental issue (broadly defined) in education (also broadly defined). I don’t claim these papers or articles represent Truth with a capital “T,” only that they discuss salient education issues.
In this post, I refer you to a New Yorker article by Malcolm Gladwell (best-selling author of The Tipping Point and Blink) entitled Most Likely to Succeed. In this 2008 piece, Gladwell develops an analogy about football quarterbacks.
Gladwell argues that at present teacher recruitment, training, and retention, are highly structured and dependent upon developing credentials and reaching sometimes arbitrary milestones (completing a teacher training program, earning tenure after a certain number of years of employment). Despite all the training and credentials, however, many teachers do not really have an opportunity to find out if they will be successful (and happy) as educators until they are actually in a classroom on their own, despite the barriers they had to overcome to get there. In contrast, Gladwell points out that football quarters in professional leagues are recruited out of college, but college success does not correlate strongly with professional success – many quarterbacks who were stars in college fail in the pro league, while some mediocre college players shine as professionals.
Gladwell writes:
We shouldn’t be raising standards [people must meet to become teachers]. We should be lowering them, because there is no point in raising standards if standards don’t track with what we care about.
Teaching should be open to anyone with a pulse and a college degree—and teachers should be judged after they have started their jobs, not before….It needs an apprenticeship system that allows candidates to be rigorously evaluated.
Kane and Staiger have calculated that, given the enormous differences between the top and the bottom of the profession, you’d probably have to try out four candidates to find one good teacher. That means tenure can’t be routinely awarded, the way it is now.
Currently, the salary structure of the teaching profession is highly rigid, and that would also have to change in a world where we want to rate teachers on their actual performance. An apprentice should get apprentice wages. But if we find eighty-fifth-percentile teachers who can teach a year and a half’s material in one year, we’re going to have to pay them a lot—both because we want them to stay and because the only way to get people to try out for what will suddenly be a high-risk profession is to offer those who survive the winnowing a healthy reward.
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.