Reclaiming Teacher Preparation for Success in High-Needs Schools.

Abstract

Introduction A careful examination of the nation's teacher shortage statistics reveals that the need for qualified teachers is not equally distributed among our nation's school districts. Even the casual observer quickly notices that the vacancies most often posted in the newspaper or on county office of education web sites are in nigh-needs, low-performing schools, rather than in high performing schools. High-needs schools are defined as those that have at least 20% of their students' families living below the poverty line (2003, Ready to Teach Act). Among the many reasons contributing to the unequal distribution of qualified teachers is the low retention rate of teachers in high-needs schools. Overall, it is estimated that nearly a third of teachers leave the profession sometime during their first three years, and almost half leave after five years. This rate is even higher in low-income communities (2002, National Commission on Teaching and America's Future). New teachers are often unsuccessful in high-needs schools because, despite the best intentions, teacher credential programs fail to prepare them for success in these complicated environments. While graduates of teacher credential programs may be categorized as highly qualified, they still may not possess the kind of knowledge and experiences required for success in these more challenging schools. Cochran-Smith (2003) states that the current agenda for a highly-qualified [i.e., universally capable] teacher is based on a set of mutually dependent assumptions. Among these assumptions are that teaching is a technical activity, knowledge is static, good practice is universal, being prepared to teach is being to do what works, and pupil learning is equal to higher scores on high-stakes tests. These assumptions reduce to what Giroux (1988) calls the proletarianization of teacher work. For example, when is viewed as a technical activity, teacher work is reduced to managing curricular programs rather than developing critically and appropriating curricula to fit specific pedagogical concerns (Giroux, 1988). When the pre-established curriculum and methods do not work for students (which is often the case in high-needs schools), teachers trained in credential programs based on a technical focus are apt to fail and become disillusioned. My story as a first year teacher, having been a product of a technically-based program, illustrates the potential difficulties. My Story: Encounters with the Unexplained I had just moved from Omaha, Nebraska to Rochester, New York and had taken a position as a first year teacher in one of Rochester's inner-city, combination junior high/high schools. The school population consisted primarily of African-American and Puerto Rican students, with a handful of Caucasian students. My assignment was to teach the low-track 7th grade science classes and the mid-track 10th grade biology class. The first day was a blur of trying to learn names, making seating charts, and cajoling students to fill out information sheets. As students entered the room, I noticed there was an unusual amount of yelling out names and fist-a-cuffing. And that was the best day of the year. Each day was a struggle--my agenda against the students' agenda. And my interpretation of the students' agenda was that they were simply trying to cultivate chaos. I felt I was in a constant battle to maintain the order I thought a classroom was suppose to have. My students had no books they could take home for homework assignments. We were given one class set of textbooks to be shared by all 4 of my science sections and also with the teacher who used the room the other three periods of the day. When I inquired as to why there was such a book shortage, my department chair stated that students would just lose them anyway. One of my most memorable days was an interaction I had with a female student named Charisse, who was constantly disturbing the class. …