Real life rebuttal of Gates, Duncan, Gingrich

[Jakes Progress]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/llana-garon/highly-qualified-highly-m_b_802177.html

In the wake of heated debates about ways in which teacher efficacy can be most effectively judged, this current move seems particularly misguided. Instead of putting tried and true teachers in the classrooms that need them most, the amendment allows a perpetuation of the status quo: high-needs schools serve as a training ground for the most inexperienced teachers, the majority of whom leave before they ever have a chance to be truly useful to the communities and profession that they serve. For NCLB to then allow this fact to be hidden from parents behind meaningless designations seems not only ineffectual, but downright unethical.

An honest woman with something to say rather than a clueless buerocrat with a jump shot and the president's ear.

Unfortunately, the two-year mark -- which is pretty much exactly the time it takes for an average teacher to get "good" -- is the duration of the commitment required by most alternative certification programs, including my program (NYCTF), Teach for America, and the regional teacher corps programs across the country that fall under the umbrella of the New Teacher Project. During most of their tenure in these programs, the majority of new teachers are not only under-qualified for certification, but also completely clueless.

[LWolf]

1. It helps to downgrade the profession.

Promoting a revolving door of inexperienced teachers. Placing them in the areas of highest need also helps to perpetuate the "failed public system" myth.

[DCKit]

2. It's what they do - defund, deregulate and destroy, then say "but it's not working. Scrap it."

Because, obviously, they have no choice.

They're more than halfway done with the Schools. SS, MediCare/MediCaid and government pensions (for the plebes who actually do the work, but not Congress) on the chopping block.

[xchrom]

3. Recommend