Career ladders and master teachers

An important issue is the “careerless” nature of teaching. “Careerless” in this case means the lack of advancement possibilities for classroom teachers. Other careers usually hold out the hope of advancement within the organization or through individual entrepreneurial skills. An office worker can move through the hierarchy of the organization, and a professional can attempt to increase income through his or her own ability.

Traditionally, when teachers entered the classroom there was no possibility of advancement except to leave the classroom and be trained as an administrator—or to get out of the education profession completely. Most teachers could not increase their income by superior teaching or service. In fact, merit pay is often opposed by teachers because of its potential abuse. Career ladders and master-teacher plans attempt to correct the problem of the careerless nature of teaching and the lack of rewards for superior teaching by providing different career levels. One way of understanding this idea is to compare it to university teaching. Traditionally, universities hire new faculty members as assistant professors. After a period of five to seven years the faculty member applies for tenure and a position as an associate professor. Once promoted to associate professor, the faculty member might be promoted to professor if he or she demonstrates superior qualities in teaching or scholarship. Each advancement in rank provides increased recognition and rewards.

The same basic idea underlies proposals for career ladders and master-teacher plans. A teacher might be hired as an apprentice teacher and after a number of years of receiving satisfactory evaluations be promoted to the rank of regular teacher and receive tenure. Later, if the teacher if considered superior, that teacher might be promoted to master teacher. It is important to understand that this is only a simple example. Some proposals are more complex and involve added duties for the master teacher.

In addition to overcoming the problem of the careerless nature of teaching, master-teacher and career-ladder proposals are supposed to solve the problems inherent in traditional methods of compensating teachers. The traditional salary schedule for teachers allows for increases in pay with each year of service and for added academic degrees from universities. Under a traditional pay plan all beginning certified teachers with a bachelor’s degree receive the same base salary. For each year of service after the first year, salaries increase by a fixed percentage. Under this method of payment a teacher receives an automatic salary increase with each year of service. In addition, a teacher can increase his or her salary by earning more college credits. Usually, the earning of a master’s degree results in an increase in salary in addition to the automatic yearly increase. Also, there are usually increases for earning an additional fifteen hours beyond the master’s degree and for earning a doctoral degree.

One of the major complaints about the traditional method of compensation is that it is not based on the ability of teachers to teach. This became a heated issue in the early 1980s when everyone admitted that teachers were underpaid but many felt that salaries should be increased only for superior teachers. This is the reason for proposals for career ladders and master teachers. These plans are considered as replacements for the traditional salary schedule.

Another plan for providing additional compensation without changing the traditional salary schedule is that of merit pay. With merit pay, superior teachers would be identified and would receive an additional salary increase over their automatic yearly increase in salary. But merit-pay plans have been bitterly resisted by teachers because of the problem of setting criteria for superior teaching. This is also an issue with career ladders and master-teacher proposals. Teachers fear that school administrators will use merit pay to reward only personal favorites and those who are compliant with administrative orders. There is also the real difficulty of defining and evaluating superior teaching.

Most proposals for career ladders include extra duties for teachers, including supervising other teachers during their probationary years and planning curriculum. Traditionally, teachers have been confined to classrooms, extracurricular activities, policing chores, and committees established by the school principal. Supervision of new teachers introduces a role traditionally assumed by the administration. It adds an administrative function to the role of teaching. Participation in planning curriculum adds another dimension to the role of teaching.

Adding responsibilities and extending the months of the teaching contract are criticized as not providing an actual increase in compensation but only additional pay for additional work. It would, however, be possible to have the category of master teacher include additional compensation without adding extra work. In the university system, promotion from assistant to associate or full professor does not entail any additional responsibilities. Similar criticisms can be made of the extended contract year. Why not just increase salaries without requiring additional months of work?

How the issues of compensation and extra duties are distributed is exemplified by the career ladder introduced in Tennessee in 1984. Under the original plan, the Tennessee legislature established five levels in the career ladder, with additional compensation ranging from $500 to $7, 000 per year. The first level is for new teachers on probationary status who receive state certification after receiving positive evaluations. Teachers who receive certification become apprentice teachers for three years and receive a yearly supplement of $500. Apprentice teachers are evaluated each year and by the third year must receive tenure and be promoted to Career Level One teachers or lose their jobs. Career Level One teachers are certified at this level for five years and receive an annual supplement of $1, 000. Teachers at this career level assume the additional duties of supervising student teachers and probationary teachers.

Under this plan a teacher might remain at Career Level One for his or her entire teaching career. Promotion to Career Level Two requires evaluation by the state, using Career Level Three teachers from outside the district of the teacher being evaluated. If the teacher is promoted to Level Two, he or she receives an annual pay supplement of $2, 000 for a 10-month contract and $4, 000 for an 11-month contract. Career Level Two teachers are given the additional responsibilities of working with remedial and gifted students, along with supervising apprentice teachers. The evaluation procedure for Level Three is similar to that of Level Two. Level Three teachers receive an additional $3, 000 for a 10-month contract, $5, 000 for an 11-month contract, and $7, 000 for a 12-month contract. In addition to the duties added for Level Two teachers, Level Three teachers also conduct evaluations of teachers who are on other career levels.

An important issue in career ladders is teacher participation in evaluation of other teachers. Traditionally, evaluation of teachers has been conducted by school administrators. Teachers complained for years about this system and they argued that if teachers are truly professionals, they should be evaluated by their peers. The Tennessee legislation incorporates this idea by using Level Three teachers for evaluation. Also, most master-teacher proposals give senior teachers the added duty of participating in teacher evaluations.

The issue of method of evaluation is more complex. The debate on this issue ranges across several dimensions. First is the problem of whether teachers should be evaluated on the basis of their performance in the class- room or the performance of their students. The difficulty of using student performance is the range of abilities existing among students and between classes of students. Some students, because of a variety of factors, including family background and intelligence, might learn faster than other students. It would be unfair to evaluate a teacher of students with rapid learning abilities against a teacher of students with slow learning abilities. Also, most evaluations of students are conducted by using standardized tests. Systems using student performance as a means of teacher evaluation run the danger of teachers directing their efforts mainly toward preparing students to do well on performance tests.

If teacher performance becomes the basis for evaluation, then there will be a set of problems arising from the need to define good teaching. Historically, there has been an almost continuous debate dating from the nineteenth century over whether teaching is an art or a science. Obviously one’s position on this issue would be reflected in the teaching qualities one would consider in evaluation. In recent years there has been a debate between those who believe that good teaching is composed of measurable competencies, and those who believe that good teaching is a product of experience that is displayed in reaction to a variety of classroom situations.

Salaries are the central and continuing issues regarding career ladders. Career ladders can be used to spend less money on teachers’ salaries by only rewarding those in the upper rungs. Teachers’ organizations are very aware of this possibility. Only by providing adequate compensation to all teachers will state and local school systems be able to convince teachers to support the concept of career ladders.

Career ladders represent one aspect of the current attempt to improve the profession of teaching. Another idea for increasing the status of teaching is national certification. And, like career-ladder plans, national certification has been attacked by teachers’ organizations.

National Certification

The current efforts to establish national certification of teachers began in 1986 when the Task Force on Teaching as a Profession, working under the auspices of the Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy, proposed changing the basic structure of the teaching profession. Its recommendations included the formation of a national certification board, which was then established in 1987 as the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

The justification for national certification included economic need and a shortage of qualified teachers. The task force report, A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the 21st Century, is premised on the belief that America can no longer compete in mass-production goods in world markets. Consequently, the report argues, the nation must shift its economy to emphasize knowledge-based industries. In this context, the schools must stop teaching repetitive skills needed in mass production and start teaching all students higher order thinking. According to the report, the old educational requirements needed for a mass-production economy could be packaged in texts, and teachers could be trained to use those texts. A knowledge-based economy, according to the report, requires students who are intellectually prepared to deal with a non-routine world and unexpected events. The report argues that the training of students in higher order skills requires abandoning traditional textbook teaching and developing new teaching strategies. These new teaching strategies require a teacher who no longer uses routine teaching methods, but constantly adapts to different learning situations. That is why, at least in the eyes of the Carnegie Forum, the key to changing the schools to meet the requirements of a knowledge-based economy is the reform of the profession of teaching.

The report describes the teacher needed for a knowledge-based economy as one who is highly creative and has the ability to constantly learn as new knowledge becomes available. In the words of the report, these new teachers “must think for themselves if they are to help others think for themselves, be able to act independently and collaborate with others, and render critical judgement. They must be people whose knowledge is wide-ranging and whose understanding runs deep”.

The Carnegie Forum believes the teacher shortage provides an ideal opportunity to change the profession of teaching and, as a result, adapt the schools to the requirements of a knowledge-based economy. The report’s figures show that in 1985 the demand for teachers was roughly equal to the supply of teachers. In the 1990s, there was an increasing demand and a decreasing supply.

It is important to understand the reasons for this projected shortage of teachers because it provides insight into the challenging demographic patterns in teaching. One reason for the projected increase demand for teachers is increasing teacher retirements. When the baby boom ended in the 1970s and classrooms were closed because of decreasing student enrollments, school systems stopped hiring many new teachers and fired many young teachers. Consequently, the average age of teachers increased. Adding to the problem of teacher retirements is an increase in school populations as the children of baby boom parents enter school.

While the teacher shortage offers the opportunity for changing the profession by hiring large numbers of new teachers, there is the potential for a decrease in the academic qualifications of teachers. One hope for improving the quality and the status of the profession is, according to the Carnegie Forum, national certification. To achieve this goal, the Forum organized in 1987 the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards consisting of sixty-four members, the majority of whom are teachers. The goal is to create a national teaching certificate that would be in addition to the current licensing of teachers by individual states.

Under the plan, states would continue to issue licenses to ensure that prospective teachers meet the minimum standards established by state laws, and to signify that the holder is not a danger to public safety and the safety of a client. The national certificate would indicate that the holder meets the standards established by the profession itself. The purpose of a national certification board, then, is to establish standards for the profession of teaching and to certify that individuals meet these standards.

One of the first tasks of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards is the creation of a test that would qualify candidates for the national certificate. In addition, the board must establish prerequisites for certification. This is the issue that has generated the greatest controversy.

In the 1993-1994 school year, the National Board for Professional Teach­ing Standards conducted assessments for certification of teachers of English-language arts to children in early adolescence. This initial assessment was part of a broader plan to field test assessments in a network of schools and districts in nineteen states. As originally planned, this initial assessment includes a written test of content knowledge, a three-part portfolio exercise, and exercises given at an assessment center. The portfolio exercises include a planning and teaching segment where the teacher is asked to keep over a three-week period videotapes, student work, classroom handouts, and other material. This segment of the portfolio is used to determine a teacher’s ability to plan and conduct teaching sessions. For the second part of the portfolio, student learning, the teacher keeps folders tracking the learning of two students. And the last segment of the portfolio is a videotape of the teacher and students engaged in a discussion of a piece of literature.

One of the important questions regarding this assessment is who should do the judging. At the summer 1992 meeting of the Board it was decided that only classroom teachers would be allowed to do the assessing. This is an important advance in the professionalization of education. Professionalism is often defined in terms of its members controlling access to the profession. Teacher control combined with national certification, it is hoped, will enhance the profession of teaching in the public’s eyes.

 

& Reading 3

TEACHER EDUCATION

In 1992, when the two largest teacher-training institutions in Maryland, the University of Maryland and Towson State University, approved the abolition of the undergraduate major in teacher education, they were following the lead of criticism of teacher education begun in the 1980s. At the heart of this criticism is the argument that American schools failed to meet the nation’s economic needs because of poorly trained and anti-intellectual teachers. The cry of the 1980s was that teachers, particularly elementary school teachers, needed a stronger academic background. Consequently, teacher-training institutions around the country began to require that elementary school teachers earn a liberal arts degree before entering a teacher-training program. Maryland educators reacted to this reform movement by requiring a liberal arts degree before entering a fifth-year professional training program in education.

These important changes reflect the relationship between the goals of education, and the content and organization of teacher training. This relationship can be found in the 1983 report that sparked the current ongoing changes in teacher education, Л Nation at Risk, which links a declining economy to mediocre schools. A major cause of poor schools, the report argues, is poor teaching training. The report complains that elementary school teacher candidates spend 41 percent of their course time in education courses. In addition, the report expresses concern that too many “teachers are being drawn from the bottom quarter of graduating high school and college students.”

In 1992, these themes appeared again in the report of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, Teacher Education for the Twenty-First Century. But, what is different in this 1992 report as compared to A Nation at Risk is a requirement for “multicultural proficiency”. The association’s report calls for the education of “teacher-scholars”, who have a strong liberal arts education with an in-depth focus on subject matter and training in a professional school of education. The teacher-scholar, according to the report, should have a knowledge of methods of instruction, human development, learning theories, affective skills, and, of course, subject matter. The requirement for proficiency in multicultural education reflects the goals for education in the 1990s.

As these two reports indicate, the goals of education and social issues have a direct impact on teacher education. But, despite these pressures, there continues to be certain logic to the requirements that must be met before a person becomes a teacher. It is logical that teachers know the subject matter they are to teach, the psychological and physical natures of those they plan to teach, the political and social structures of the institutions in which they will be teaching, the methods by which people learn, and the best methods for teaching a particular subject matter.

Most teacher-education programs include all of the above components.

Teaching not only requires knowing the subject matter, the learner, and the political and social context of learning; it also involves skills that can be improved through actual practice. All teacher-education programs have some form of practice teaching that allows experienced teachers to aid prospective teachers in gaining teaching skills. Some teacher-education programs require observation periods before actual practice teaching. Other programs provide clinical experiences before or during practice teaching.

Although most teacher educators would agree that the preceding combination of knowledge and skill development should form the basic components of a teacher-education program, there are disagreements about the actual content of each component, the proportion of time that should be devoted to each area, and the additional knowledge and skills necessary for teaching. There are also general disagreements about the whole process of teacher training.

While there is certain logic to requiring a prospective teacher to study certain courses before entering the classroom, there is still criticism of the whole process. In recent years, states have turned to teacher examinations as a means of improving the quality of teachers. As states turn to an examination system as a means of certification, the political struggle becomes extremely important.

The same problem exists with any statewide evaluation of teacher performance. Educators do not agree about what makes a good teacher or about how to evaluate teaching. There are several schools of thought. Within any college of education one can find as many ideas about what constitutes good teaching as there are professors or education. What items are to be used in the evaluation of teaching performance or on examinations in pedagogy, and how answers are to be determined, is very important.

The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching’s report, High School, provided more specific recommendations for carrying out the general improvement of teacher education. The author of the report, Ernest Boyer, recommended that the first two years of college training be devoted to the study of a core of common learning. The responsibility for this core curriculum would be in the hands of the liberal arts faculty. Admission to a teacher-education program would occur in the junior year of college, and admission would require a “B” average or better plus strong recommendations from two professors. The teacher-education program would be three years long, with the first two years (the student’s junior and senior years) devoted to completing a major in an academic discipline and to classroom observation.

After studying a core curriculum and completing an academic major the prospective teacher would take teacher-education courses. Boyer is aware of the criticism directed at education courses He writes, “While many speak disparagingly of teacher-education courses, we conclude there is important information uniquely relevant to teachers.” Boyer believes that four areas of study should be part of the teacher-education curriculum. The first area is what the report calls “schooling in America.” This course would be devoted to the history of education and current issues in education. The other three areas would deal with “learning theory and research, ” “teaching of writing, ” and “the use of technology”. Boyer writes that “all teacher education students should study theories of learning, the ways teachers teach and students learn, and examine also the findings ofcurrent psychological and physiological research bearing on these themes.” Boyer’s emphasis on prospective teachers learning to teach writing reflects the general concern of the report with language instruction The report argues that writing is not only an essential skill for self-expression, but is also an important means of teaching critical thinking. Boyer believes that all teachers should be prepared to teach students how to write better Also prospective teachers should study educational technology, including computers, as a means of significantly improving classroom instruction.

In addition to the course work, Boyer recommends that the fifth year include classroom observation and practice teaching. He recognizes that teaching ability is dependent upon the type of experience that can only be gained in practice and in working with other experienced teachers, which is why he believes that practice teaching should be done with a team of teachers. The report also recommends that fifth-year teacher-education students should meet with outstanding arts and sciences “scholar-teachers” in a series of common learning seminars to “relate the knowledge of their fields to a contemporary political or social theme.” Boyer expresses the hope that this seminar will help prospective teachers to relate to other disciplines and be able to teach a common core of learning to students in the schools.

A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the 21st Century, discussed in detail in the previous section, links raising standards in teacher education to increasing the status of teaching and, as a result, attracting more capable students to education programs. Basic to the report’s program of restructuring teacher education is the replacement of undergraduate programs in education with graduate programs in education. While the report states that the national certification board will not establish national standards for teacher education, the authors do admit that their proposed evaluation techniques and standards for certification will have a significant effect on teacher education.

In general, A Nation Prepared advocates an undergraduate program devoted to a broad liberal education and a thorough study of the subject or subjects the student plans to teach. In keeping with the general trend toward a core curriculum, the report recommends an undergraduate curriculum that would provide rigorous study of history, government, science, literature, and the arts. The authors argue that elementary teachers need the same strong academic background as high school teachers because they have equal responsibility to impart our common culture and heritage.

Professional courses in education would be provided at the graduate level in a master-in-teaching degree program, to give teachers information about techniques of teaching, research on teaching, human development, and different learning styles. In addition, teachers seeking advanced certification would study philosophy of education, policies in education, and techniques of measurement.

The ideal two-year master-in-teaching degree program as outlined by the report would begin with a semester of courses on methods ofinstruction. During the second semester, students would perform an internship in teaching at a school with a diverse student population while taking several other graduate courses in education. In the following summer students would take a full load of courses building on the teaching experience o: the internship. Finally, students would spend the second year in residence at a school working under the guidance of a lead teacher.

 

  Reading 4

TEACHER AS RESEARCHER AND SCHOLAR

When the report Teacher Education for the Twenty-First Century calls for the education of “teacher-scholars, ” it is reflecting a current trend in the professional development of teachers. The concept of teacher as researcher and teacher as scholar refers to the active research by teachers into their own classroom practices. In the past, teachers were often treated as passive objects by college professors who believed they could tell teachers the best means of improving their teaching. In addition, there was a tendency to promote “teacher-proof” classroom materials. Teacher-proof materials were to be so highly structured that they could not be misused by poor teachers. Basically, teacher-proof material turned the teacher into a technician whose major function was to implement someone else’s teaching methods and materials.

In contrast to teacher-proof material, the model of teacher as researcher and scholar assumes that classroom teachers are the best persons to do research on classroom methods and materials. In addition, the model assumes that part of the satisfaction of teaching involves the development of new methods of instruction and new classroom materials. In this model, the teacher assumes the responsibility of judging his or her own teaching methods, experimenting with and evaluating new methods, and actively exploring new methods of instruction by working with other teachers and seeking advice from university researchers and scholarly publications. The model also assumes that teachers are scholars of the material they teach. Through their own scholarly pursuits, teachers develop their own classroom material rather than rely upon others.

One of the arguments supporting the idea of teacher as researcher and scholar is that teachers are the best source of information about teaching and that their shared experiences provide a method of improving instruction. In Creating Spaces and Finding Voices: Teachers Collaborating for Empowerment, Janet Miller provides an example of the importance of teachers relying on their own experience and abilities to develop teaching strategies, or what Janet Miller calls “finding their voices”. In the book, which is a narrative about a group of teachers exploring their own experiences in teaching, Miller tells the story of “The Carton of Knowledge”. In this story, a new teacher of a college course receives a carton of lesson plans and classroom material from the previous teacher of the course. Initially, the new teacher unpacked the carton and tried to replicate the teaching of the previous teacher. After the teacher's initial attempts to use the material from the carton, she realized that her perspective on the course was quite different from that of the previous teacher. In addition, she was angry with herself for so willingly trying to follow the previous teacher's methods rather than expressing herself through her own materials and methods. She realized that most teachers and students are treated as passive objects who receive their wisdom from others. But passivity leads to poor teaching because teachers lose enthusiasm and creative energy, and their understanding of the subject matter is clouded by the imposition of someone else’s ideas.

The development of the model of teacher as researcher and scholar depends on teachers sharing experience. For instance, in Teacher Lore: Learning from Our Own Experience, teachers analyze their own classroom experiences and share them with other teachers. The editors of the book, William Schubert and William Ayers, argue that most teachers reflect on their own experiences and constantly monitor their teaching. Through this reflection, teachers are constantly improving their instructional practices and classroom materials. It is this active research on the part of teachers, they argue, that can provide the basis for improving the teaching of all teachers. The key to this process is giving teachers confidence in their own work and the opportunity to share it with others.

The profession of teaching has changed greatly since the nineteenth-century model of teachers as paragons of morality. The current emphasis on teacher as researcher and scholar reflects the growing control of the profession by teachers. Teachers are no longer passive objects; they are actively involved in improving their professional status and in improving teaching methods. As I will discuss in the next chapter, an important factor in current trends in professionalism is the power of the two teachers' unions.

 

JK Role play

A panel discussion programme appears on TV. Several members of the public are invited to give their opinions. Questions for discussion are sent in by the viewers. The chairperson reads out the questions and directs the panel.

1. Interview teachers regarding the rewards and dissatisfactions they gain from teaching. Compare the results of these interviews with a classroom survey on why students want to be teachers.

2. Working in small groups, devise your ideal plan for the professionalization of teaching. In developing this plan, the following questions should be considered: Should there be local, state, or national certification of teachers? Who should control entrance into the profession? Should appropriate college courses in education be a requirement for entering the profession? Should national or state examinations be required of teachers? If examinations are required, then who should determine the content of the examinations? Should there be moral standards for entrance into the profession?

3. Working in small groups, devise an ideal curriculum for teacher education. Included in the discussion of this curriculum should be a consideration of whether or not education courses should be taught in a fifth-year program. Compare your ideal program to the one currently offered by their college.

 

 

ЛИТЕРАТУРА

 

Практический курс английского языка, 4 курс. Под ред. В. Д. Аракина. - М., «Владос», 1998.

Advanced Grammar and vocabulary. Mark Skipper. – Express Publishing, Newbury, 2002.

American Education. Joel Spring. - McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1994.

Britain Explored. P. Harvey. - L., 1992.

Britain Today. Richard Musman. - Longman, 1994

For and Against. L. G. Alexander. An Oral Practice Book for Advanced Students of English. - L., 1971.

Headway Advanced. J. and L. Soars. - Oxford University Press, 1998

Linguophone Advanced English Course. - London, 1985.

Listening File

More Than Words. J. Harmer and R. Rosner. - L., 1998.

Profile UK. Alan C McAllen, L., 1992.

Raise the Issues. Carol Numrich. - Longman Publishing Group, 1994.

The Practice of English Language Teaching. Jeremy Harmer. - L., 2005.

Understanding Ideas. Advanced Reading Skills. M. Swan, 1988.

Интернет– сайты

 

Conversation Questions for the ESL/EFL Classroom. A list of over 400 questions for conversational practice.

Learning Oral English Online. An online conversation book complied for intermediate English language learner.

Time Cast-The Real Audio Guide. A complete listening for Real Audio broadcasts from all around the world.

www.cnn.com

www.ABCNEWS.com

www.izvestia.ru

Газеты и журналы

1. “The Economist”

2. “The Guardian”

3. “The Washington Post”

4. “Sociology”

5. “The Times”

1. «Известия»

2. «Аргументы и факты»

8. «Советская Белоруссия»

 

⇐ Предыдущая891011121314151617

Поделиться: