National Council on Teacher Quality study criticizes the educators of teachers

The National Council on Teacher Quality released its first annual report, “Teacher Prep Review,” a comprehensive evaluation of the quality of the colleges and universities that train the nation’s teachers. Using a four-star rating system, the Review assesses the 1,130 institutions that train 99% of schoolteachers.

The study finds that three-quarters of teacher-training institutions in the U.S. earned only two stars. Researchers found that:

“[these institutions] have become an industry of mediocrity, churning out first-year teachers with classroom management skills and content knowledge inadequate to thrive in classrooms with ever-increasing ethnic and socioeconomic diversity.”

Out of Washington state’s 24 teacher-training institutions, only one made the Honor Roll of 3 stars or better: Washington State University’s undergraduate preparation program for high school teachers. Two schools in Washington made the Consumer Alert list of the nation’s lowest-performing programs: the University of Washington’s graduate programs for high school teachers in Bothell and Tacoma.

Other study findings include:

• "It is too easy to get into a teacher preparation program. The modal GPA requirement for the undergraduate programs in the sample is only 2.5."

• "Most teacher candidates -- even prospective graduate teacher candidates whose peers are taking high-level graduate admissions tests -- are required at most to only pass a test of middle school-level skills."

• "Some 70% of undergraduate elementary programs do not require teacher candidates to take even a single science course."

• "Three out of four elementary programs are not teaching proven methods of reading instruction."

The NCTQ researchers hope their report will create market pressure on teacher training programs to improve. This is most unlikely. Legislatures have given schools of education monopoly power over the training and certification of teachers. Since schools of education have a captive audience of candidates forced to attend their schools, and a captive set of schools which must hire their candidates, why would they ever change?

Administrators at schools of education are deeply resistant to change. They strongly oppose reforms or improved methods. Only pressure from parents will force them to improve.