Critics have been pointing out the failings of education schools for decades, with few positive results. So why not foster competition instead?
That is the proposal offered by John E. Stone, an education professor at East Tennessee State University, who spoke at a Pope Center luncheon on January 11 in Charlotte. What bothers Stone is that schools of education are more interested in esoteric education theory and social justice issues than they are in teaching future teachers practical methods that lead to academic achievement.
If colleges aren’t going to reform, then let others see if they can do a better job, says Stone. He points out that the typical university has departments that could easily expand their offerings to produce effective teachers. A psychology department, for example, has a strong foundation for teaching potential teachers. Even a special education department within an education school could build a curriculum to train effective teachers without getting sidetracked by education theory.
And what about a business school?
Many programs, Stone said in an email to me, “have the behavioral science, training, and human resource development expertise that would be needed but without all of the conceptual and ideological baggage carried by the traditional P-12 faculty.” (P-12 is the new name for K-12, by the way, because it now starts in pre-school.)
Stone is a fan of competition in his role as president of the Education Consumers Foundation, which represents students and parents. It describes itself as a Consumers Union in the field of education. (See www.education-consumers.org.)
Stone says that the door has opened for such competition in North Carolina. The State Board of Education, which oversees K-12 public education, just adopted a policy that allows for innovation in training teachers.
This plan is designed to correct a severe problem in North Carolina – the difficulty of becoming a certified teacher if you have a degree in a discipline such as math or English, but not in education. Until now, such “lateral entry” has been riddled with restrictions. Last year, the legislature loosened some of the most onerous ones, such as the requirement that lateral entry teachers have been out of school for five years!
And in August, the Board of Education approved a route by which a college or community college can work with a specific school system to develop an alternative program for lateral entry. Such a program could be expanded to undergraduate programs such as psychology, says Stone.
The Pope Center has ventured onto the tempestuous seas of K-12 education with the publication of a paper on schools of education in the University of North Carolina. In “University of North Carolina Education Schools: Helping or Hindering Potential Teachers?” George K. Cunningham argues that most education schools (not just in North Carolina but around the country) put a low priority on getting children to learn traditional math and reading. Instead, they stress “non-academic goals including diversity, self-esteem, ‘critical thinking,’ and efforts at promoting social justice.”
Cunningham was a speaker on January 11 along with Stone and Mary Lynne Calhoun, dean of the school of education at UNC-Charlotte. Calhoun contended that the education school that she heads stresses both academic achievement and students’ learning experiences.
As one who favors competitive markets, I find the idea of intra-university competition proposed by Stone to be refreshing. Education schools would be strengthened by having to focus on their best programs so that they retain students. “If the programs that have historically prepared teachers are as expert and effective as they claim to be, the results will affirm their claim,” says Stone. “If not, they will either need to rethink their approach or find some other line of work.”
Jane S. Shaw is executive vice president of the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy.