I don't believe this bill is very good at all for the work we do in Pennsylvania to prepare teachers for professional practice in the classroom.
There is no public good more important to the success and well-being of a society than the education of its children. If our society is to flourish, we must provide our kids with an education that helps them learn and develop so that when they grow up they can participate in our democracy, contribute to our economy, and be good stewards of the resources we will pass on to them.
And, there is strong professional consensus that a clinical preparation – hands-on development of skills over time in real classrooms – is the most effective way to prepare teachers for this important work. Strong clinical approaches provide teacher candidates with school-based opportunities to integrate the application of theory with the learning of pedagogical skills in ways that are purposive, well-designed, and coherent; and that allow for skill acquisition and reflection in a very focussed way over time. Of course, an important criterion of the success of this collaboration is its ability to prepare teachers, but the ultimate criterion is its impact on PK-12 students.
Best practice in the design and implementation of a strong
clinical preparation is characterized by university and PK-12 partners working together to build mutually
beneficial school-based clinical experiences for teacher candidates, and
assuming shared responsibility for continuous improvement of candidate
preparation and uninterrupted achievement of PK-12 learners. It is a collaborative endeavor that requires
a commitment from both partners. One of
the commitments made by higher education is to “supply” the teacher candidates
around whom this preparation is being designed.
Our school partners rely on the consistent attendance of these
candidates, who they have agreed to allow into their classrooms voluntarily, with
an understanding of an important trade-off.
Since the teacher necessarily cedes some classroom autonomy to allow the
teacher candidate to grow and develop, these teachers rely on the candidates to
be in classroom each day. To do
otherwise risks an interruption of PK-12 student learning.
Much of the important
clinical preparation candidates will receive will occur during their last four
semesters (i.e., 60 credits through graduation). Allowing
teacher candidates to substitute teach during this critical period interrupts their
preparation, prevents seamless scaffolding (incremental development over time) of
skills, and threatens coherence. It is also
a threat to the assumptions upon which clinical partnerships are based – that
teacher candidates from the university’s program can be counted upon to be in
the PK-12 classroom on the days agreed upon.
If teacher candidates are allowed to substitute teach even once a week
coherence in the clinical placement quickly turns into disarray.
The sponsor of the bill has noted that “the teachers of tomorrow can help ease the substitute teacher crisis today.” I know that our school partners are facing a shortage of substitute teachers, but this bill is not the solution. The short term fix may look appealing, but it prevents us from being able to focus on the negative long term effects that the bill will create as we work to prepare teachers for future generations of Pennsylvania school children.
Until next time...
