Steve Brauntuch: Wrong reasons to Teach for America

Over the weekend, a good friend of mine submitted her application for the Teach for America Program. She's excited about the prospect of getting accepted, and she wants to be involved in similar educational endeavors no matter what profession she eventually chooses.

There's only one catch -- she has no interest in actually teaching anywhere in America when she's done.

For those uninitiated underclassmen, Teach for America is a two-year program in which college graduates are sent to low-income school districts to help ease the burden caused by the nationwide teaching shortage. After an intense training session this summer, corps members will be placed in one of 21 areas across the country where they will teach a wide variety of grades and subjects depending on the needs of individual school districts. My friend is crossing her fingers to avoid South Dakota.

According to the Teach for America Web site, the ultimate goal is to find a "growing force of leaders" that, through work in different professions, can create "the systemic changes required to put children growing up in low-income communities on a level playing field with children from more affluent areas."

In many ways, it's a stopgap measure for schools in need of manpower. It is reasonable to assume, though, that one of the program's unspoken goals is to find a group of highly educated college graduates and turn them on to the often-inglorious profession of teaching.

It speaks volumes that college students, especially notoriously snooty Ivy Leaguers, would voluntarily give up two years of their time to work in a random school and teach underprivileged kids when they won't even give up five minutes of their time to vote. And the program has rightfully seen a tremendous spike in popularity over the last few years; application numbers have risen as the job market has plummeted.

But as Teach for America becomes more and more popular on a national scale, the question becomes whether the people who commit to the program do so because they really want to teach or because they want to put off the daunting process of applying to graduate school or selecting a career. Is Teach for America becoming the new chic way to put off graduate school? And if so, does that diminish the value of the program?

I know two people who have already taken part in Teach for America. One was born to be a teacher, and after graduating from Indiana University, he worked at a school in Phoenix, Ariz., for two years. He has now taken a full-time job as a teacher in another urban area and plans to stick it out in that admirable profession for the long haul.

Another friend is in the opposite boat. He doesn't really like kids, and he doesn't really like teaching, but he wasn't really sure what to do after graduating college. He's currently serving his time at an urban school, essentially counting down the days until his time is up. In fairness, he has certainly enjoyed some aspects of the experience, but he has no intention of continuing in the field of education when he's done.

I also know several other people who have applied to Teach for America simply because they just didn't know what else to do when they got their diplomas. They weren't all qualified to work in the program, and most didn't get accepted. But that can't be the type of trend that makes program organizers happy. This program was designed as a way to help low-income school districts, not as a way for college graduates to serve two years and leave the field of education behind.

Teach for America boasts that more than 60 percent of alumni remain in the education field after their two-year term expires. You have to wonder if that percentage will drop as the popularity of the program increases. With most applicant pools, more often equals diluted. It would be a sad commentary if Teach for America, a noble program with the best intentions, became too magnanimous for its own good.

This isn't to say that people won't grow to like teaching through the program or that they won't give it their best shot if accepted. And there's no question that teaching in a low-income school district is a harder job than many college graduates will ever have. The point is that Teach for America organizers could not have envisioned their program as a way for students to avoid going directly into graduate school, and it appears to be heading in that direction.

I hope my friend gets accepted to Teach for America because I know she'll do a great job in whichever school district she is placed. But I also hope that the selection committee turns away all of those people who don't seriously care about the public school system in this country. As the program becomes more popular, accepting those types of students has the potential to put Teach for America squarely on the wrong academic track.

Steve Brauntuch is a senior communications major from Tenafly, N.J., and former editorial page editor of The Daily Pennsylvanian. Statler and Waldorf appears on Wednesdays..

Comments (13)

Steve, First, I applaud your friend for applying to TFA. It's a great program and should your friend be accepted, it will be an unbelievable experience. To speak a little towards your take on her motivations--who cares? Granted, while it would be great if she were idealistic enough to want to teach in underserved school districts for the rest of her life, think about how many people even want to do it for two years. As for your point about grads joining TFA "simply because they just didn't know what else to do when they got their diplomas", take a look at how many of your fellow seniors are planning to go to law school or grad school for that same reason. Is further education a more noble or honorable choice when you don't know what to do after graduation? If anything, I think that TFA is the more noble choice--whether she is doing it because it's just something to do or because she truly wants to teach forever, the fact is she will still be making a huge difference to the community and school in which she works. She will still be helping low-income school districts, and how can one say she shouldn't be teaching because her future life plans don't involve education? TFA cannot become "too magnanimous for its own good". That already happened, with the AmeriCorps over-enrollment and subsequent funding cut. The funding has now been restored and in fact increased to more than ever before, to allow the maximum number of people to serve. One more note: your friend may not see education as her life's work. That's fine--but please also remember that TFA is not JUST teaching. She will be interacting with students every day, gaining insight into their lives and maybe giving them hope that there is something outside of their immediate environment. Don't underestimate the possibility that she may find herself on a career path that she never would have followed had it not been for TFA--perhaps public-interest law, career counseling, financial advisor (yes, even people who are not millionaires need financial guidance), or maybe something else. Above all, please do not cheapen your friend's intentions and wishes by your cynicism. Celebrate her desire to spend her time doing something GOOD when she isn't sure where to go, rather than taking an unfulfilling job just so she can make some money. Our schools need more people like her. AmeriCorps Alum Philadelphia, PA

I feel compelled to mention another viewpoint, lest people take your somewhat cynical analysis as fact. You are taking Teach for America's stated goals, as well as their statistic regarding the 60% who remain in teaching, and just dismissing them as if you somehow know better. If one of the requirements of being of service to fellow man is that you commit forever to that particular action, then there would be far fewer soup kitchens, little league coaches, elderly meal programs, Peace Corp workers,etc. Your friend sounds like the kind of person who will be an asset to TFA - what you said about her in your second sentence is key; your third sentence is irrelevant. While she is there, she will change lives, and most likely enrich her own perspective to be of service to society in the future - no matter what career she eventually chooses. Mom of TFA member & Penn student, CEO CT

Americorps Alum: Steve has every right to question people's motives. Your comparison between the student who does not know what to do after gradation and goes to law school and the student who does not know what to do after graduation and applies to TFA is erroneous. TFA invests in its members and if individuals drop out of the program after serving their two years and receiving their education bonuses, TFA and the schools and students it serves lose. An individual who goes to law school because they cannot get a job or do not know what exactly they want to do is not hurting anyone, and most likely will end up putting their law degree to use. Above all else, teaching is a profession (and most would call it a vocation) that one should enter into because of deeper desire to enact change. It is not just a job to pass the time until graduation school or to help ease some financial burdens through loan forgiveness. Pennsylvania Alumnus

Mr. Brauntuch, While I thought your article was well written, I am dissapointed that you would question the motives of someone willing to give two years of their lives to better our nation in some way. Do we question the benefactor who gives 2 million dollars to her alma matter just to get the library named after her? the soldier who enlists because she needs a job? the police officer who joins the force because she decided she had no other options? Instead of questioning them, how about we celebrate them- for, if more people decided to use their two years of uncertainty in TFA or other like minded programs, our nation would be all the better for it. -Ribo Riboman, Owning you Philly Riboman42@yahoo.com

I simply don't think the candidates' motivation is of paramount importance to TFA. That's not to say it isn't important, just that it may not be the overriding concern. Simply stated, this type of heavily incentivized system invites participation by those who are interested in the incentives--and sometimes nothing more. That won't make them better or worse teachers, necessarily, as long as TFA weeds out the applicants it feels would not be an asset regardless of motivation. If the creators of TFA were primarily interested in fostering long-term commitment to teaching, I would think they would have come up with another system--one perhaps more heavily concentrated in teacher education and recruitment of candidates a little further upstream (i.e. not college graduates). But they didn't. They decided to take advantage of a very highly motivated population (college graduates) that might be in need of direction at that time in their lives. I think TFA is a great program that produces many benefits. As long as that is the case, the program in my view is a success. Jim Saint

Steve, Your articles are a good read because they are well researched and carefully articulated. However, they often miss the point. Getting college graduates, especially motivated and intelligent ones, to spend two years teaching in undesireable conditions for low pay is hardly fun. It's not even as fun as community service. What it is, is noble and respectable. I applaud all my friend who work for TFA regardless of their motivation. Dude and Car

This was a column that needed to be written. Furthermore, I wouldn't mind seeing some more in-depth studies on the TFA program and the teachers that it attracts. Although, there certainly are TFA candidates who love working with kids and/or are sincerely hoping to jump into a teaching career, it's always seemed to me that this contingent is in the minority. Most TFA'ers are over-privileged dilettantes who decide to go slummin' for a couple of years (if for no other reason than to have another life-experience story to tell at future cocktail parties)while they figure out what they are really go to do with their lives. Moreover, TFA alumni status looks great on grad-school applications - and TFA candidates know this. This is not to say that I think TFA should be discontinued. But I think the admissions committee needs to develop a system that more effectively weeds out those who are just in it for the hell of it(ie. by really questioning the applicants who don't have any past experience with kids or who haven't shown any previous interest in teaching or education). Kerri Madigan, grad student NJ

I wonder if some of the people responding to this article (and the author, for that matter) gave their opinions even a cursory second thought. Are you all suggesting that if someone doesn't know what they want to do with their lives (God forbid) that they should do nothing at all?! Duh. Furthermore, very often in service jobs (such as teaching, law enforcement, and the military to nmae a few) people are enticed to sign up with material incentives. However, after getting their feet wet they realize it is a career they find enormously fulfilling. Roy, grad student chicago

Response to Roy - although I think you make a valid general point, there's a material difference in going to law school as a fall-back plan after college graduation and working with at-risk, underprivileged children as a fall-back plan. At the risk of sounding a bit paternalistic, alot of these students at TFA schools have a history of adults leaving them when something better or easier comes along - parents, relatives, mentors, teachers. It's not a warm or nurturing situation for children (most of whom have little experience with routines, permanence, consistency, or stability) to go to a school where the 22 year old teachers come on board and then automatically leave 2 years later to go on and pursue their real destinies. In my own childhood/adolescence, I went to suburban schools where there was very little (if any)teacher/employee turnover. In 4th grade, we always knew that Mrs. Grabel, Ms. Edwards, or Mr. Rollins would be our math teachers once we reached 6th grade. Once we reached 6th grade, we could always go back to the 4th grade wing of the school and say hi to our former teachers from years past. But TFA students aren't afforded this kind of stable environment, since so many of the TFA teacher take off at the 1st chance they get. Kerri Madigan, grad student

In response to Kerri's posting, I am wondering what the level of your familiarity with the program Teach for America is and if you have any close friends who have gone through it. I don't want to make any assumptions, but it seems impossible to me that you could make such general statements about over 10,000 teachers who have taught over 1.5 million students across the country if you were familiar with the program. I agree that it is problematic to have teachers who leave after a few years, but I believe it is more problematic to have a revolving door of substitute teachers than a teacher who is constantly in professional development, is supported by a network of thousands of teachers dedicated to social justice, and leaves after a few years to pursue other ways of promoting a just society whether it be in education or elsewhere. It is wonderful that you grew up in a nice suburban town where you had teacher stability, but that is not an option in many of the places that Teach for America teachers work. What do you suggest as an alternative? The real question is: Why are we arguing about Teach for America? Why aren't we asking why Mr. Bush is allowed to spend billions of our dollars waging war against 3rd world countries when our own country is refusing to provide all our children with an adequate education? Please note that I didn't even say an excellent education. I have to write grants to buy supplies like markers for my classroom. I don't think there are any suburban, middle class school teachers that are in the same position. How is that equitable? Mr. Bush passed the No Child Left Behind Act in 2000 which forces schools to raise test scores (as if that is a genuine way to gauge what a student is learning ... how many kids in inner cities are taking Princeton Review prep classes?) in order to get funding. Does that make sense to anyone? Additionally, all the money he has supposedly earmarked for this act is missing in action, along with his service records. I would love to see the day when Teach for America no longer has a place in public education, but with uninformed legislation like No Child Left Behind, it seems to me that TFA is serving our students much better than the president of our country. In Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Chief Justice Warren wrote, "it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education." Let us work together to see that the day when all students have that opportunity is realized in our lifetime. MizWu, Teacher San Francisco, CA

I agree with what many have said so far in this forum: The reason for being inspired to apply to TFA is not what matters. What matters is how you spend the next two years and then your lifetime after the TFA experience. If you do not like kids or really don't want to be in an inner-city school day-in and day-out for two years, believe me- there is a slim to none chance that you will last the two years. If you do fulfill the TFA commitment, then you ARE committed to children, education, and to inner city schools' problems whether you knew you were or not at the time you applied. Also, TFA has a two-fold mission and I think that Steve missed part of it. Yes, ideally, TFA would like some corps members to become life-long teachers. However, the second half of the mission is for TFA alumni to go out into the world with a better understanding of the education system in this country (among many other things). I believe that every single person who teaches in an inner city school- for a month, two years, 25 years- makes a difference in that school, then walks away and makes an even bigger difference through whatever else they choose to do with their lives whether in the field of education or not. Keep applying to TFA! Talk to someone who is in the middle of the TFA experience or to TFA alumni. So what if the percentage of alumni in the education field drops as TFA becomes a larger organization. Something is wrong with that math, Steve. In two years I taught 65 elementary school kids. If someday TFA is ten times as large, then in those years, 650 kids would have had a young, energetic, determined, motivated, loving teacher. Where is the problem? Kristin, Penn Alumna, TFA Alumna, Education research contractor for the U.S. Department of Education Washington DC

Mr. Brauntuch, Overall, you wrote a very decent article with some legitimate points in it. However, there are few things I cannot agree with you on. You overemphasize the motives of the corps members. It doesn't really matter what the TFA members are going to do afterwards and for what reason do they joint TFA. What is important is whether what they do impact the community in positive way. As long as the costs do not exceed benefits, TFA has the moral right to do what they do. It also should be obvious that people who join TFA, for the most part, do not want to be teachers the rest of their lives. If they did, there are plenty of other options (such as majoring in Secondary Ed) that are much more meaningful to pursue. Those college graduates want to impact the low-income communities and enhance their experiences as leaders. That's all. They have a perfect right to do so. Being an overachiever and a leader in college can make a teacher much more effective comparing to an average person with certification, who just happen to get a job because there is a shortage of teachers.

Kerri, Did you know that last year less that 20% of applicants were accepted? Does that in itself not speak volumes to the quality that TFA seeks out? Do some more research. You'll realize how beneficial this program is. [QUOTE id="874acccc-2d54-47db-8ead-0ed117af32c2"]This was a column that needed to be written. Furthermore, I wouldn't mind seeing some more in-depth studies on the TFA program and the teachers that it attracts. Although, there certainly are TFA candidates who love working with kids and/or are sincerely hoping to jump into a teaching career, it's always seemed to me that this contingent is in the minority. Most TFA'ers are over-privileged dilettantes who decide to go slummin' for a couple of years (if for no other reason than to have another life-experience story to tell at future cocktail parties)while they figure out what they are really go to do with their lives. Moreover, TFA alumni status looks great on grad-school applications - and TFA candidates know this. This is not to say that I think TFA should be discontinued. But I think the admissions committee needs to develop a system that more effectively weeds out those who are just in it for the hell of it(ie. by really questioning the applicants who don't have any past experience with kids or who haven't shown any previous interest in teaching or education). Kerri Madigan, grad student NJ[/QUOTE]

Comments are closed for this item.