A California legislator wants to ban inexperienced teachers in programs such as Teach for America from working in predominantly low-income schools, saying they lack the preparation to work effectively with the neediest students.
“I want to make sure we have qualified, experienced teachers with our most vulnerable students,” said Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, D-Bell Gardens.
Several studies show a correlation between teacher experience and student achievement, noting that students perform better academically as their teachers gain experience.
Yet, many educators from Teach for America or similar programs leave after three years, Garcia said. “So, right when they’re getting to proficiency, we’re losing them. I acknowledge we have a teacher shortage, but is this really part of the solution?”
Garcia, a former high school and community college math teacher from Los Angeles County, has authored AB 221, which starting in 2020-21 would prohibit teachers in so-called third-party credential programs from working in schools where 40 percent or more of the students are low-income. They can teach in those schools only if they commit to working in the organization for a minimum of five years.
This would effectively make it impossible for these schools to hire Teach for America recruits, who are asked to commit to only two years. However, many stay on for a third year. A nationwide study found that 60.5 percent of Teach for America teachers continued teaching for three years, but only 27.8 percent remained after five years.
Teach for America spokesman Jack Hardy called the bill “a misguided legislative overreach that strips public school principals of local control in hiring of state credentialed teachers” when they are facing “a massive teacher shortage.”
He urged lawmakers “to work on solutions that will increase, not limit, the supply of high-quality public school teachers in California.”
Teach for America is a nonprofit organization that recruits what the program describes as “outstanding” college graduates to commit to two years of teaching in low-income schools. They attend five weeks of summer training before they enter the classroom and receive ongoing support. The program is affiliated with accredited university teacher education programs that offer classes that prepare the teachers to earn a preliminary credential after one year.
Ashley Pangelinan, a Teach for America teacher in 2013 who became a full-time teacher in San Jose Unified, told the Assembly Education Committee on March 27 that she would not have entered the profession without the program.
“It opens doors for smart people who might not otherwise be able to afford to become teachers,” she said. “Why take away teachers like me?”
It is unclear how many teachers would be affected by the bill. This year, 725 Teach for America educators are working on intern or preliminary credentials in low-income schools across California, mainly in the Bay Area, Los Angeles, San Diego and Central Valley.
Many California districts rely on hiring teachers with less than full credentials. Yet the bill does not ban teachers with emergency permits or substitutes without teaching credentials from teaching in low-income schools.
In 2017-18, the state’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing issued 4,926 intern teacher credentials out of a 22,407 total. It also issued 7,839 emergency permits. Emergency permits are issued to meet “an acute staffing need” to applicants who have completed bachelor’s degrees, met a basic skills requirement and have completed coursework related to the subject to be taught. Teachers working with emergency permits are not required to be enrolled in a credential program. Substitute teachers may or may not have credentials, depending on the substitute teaching permit they hold.
Oakland Unified, an urban Bay Area district where nearly three-quarters of students are low-income, is an example of a district that routinely hires teachers who are not fully qualified. This year, about 90 Teach for America teachers are working in Oakland, including about 60 in district schools and 30 in charter schools. The district, which employs some 2,328 teachers, has determined it may need to hire up to 220 teachers on emergency credentials next year because “there are an insufficient number of certified persons who meet the district’s employment criteria for needed positions,” according to a resolution approved by the school board earlier this month.
In 2017-18, Oakland Unified hired 85 teachers with intern credentials and 239 with emergency permits.
Ruby De Tie, principal of Frick Impact Academy Middle School in Oakland Unified, told EdSource that it would be difficult to staff her school without Teach for America teachers because of a lack of credentialed teachers. De Tie hired four new Teach for America teachers this year and has already hired three for 2019-20.
“If this passes, I don’t know how I would staff my school,” De Tie said, adding that nearly all of her students are low-income.
About 113 Teach for America teachers work in nearby Richmond, including 76 in West Contra Costa Unified and the rest in charter schools, according to the organization.
The Assembly Education Committee voted 5-1 last month to move the bill on to the Assembly Appropriations Committee in the hopes of continuing discussions about how best to support needy students and new teachers, while helping districts cope with teacher shortages.
But the bill attracted intense opposition as well, with dozens of education-related groups and officials against it including the Loyola Marymount School of Education in Southern California, the California Charter Schools Association, the California Association of School Administrators, the Education Trust-West student advocacy group and several school districts and charter schools.
Supporters of Garcia’s limit on Teach for America and other teachers with intern credentials include the California Federation of Teachers, the NAACP and the nonprofit Network for Public Education — a New York-based non-profit that advocates for public education founded by Diane Ravitch, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education, author and education historian who has criticized Teach for America. The California Teachers Association has taken a watch position, meaning it may take a position in the future, depending on how the bill may be amended.
Although the bill originally singled out Teach for America for the ban, Garcia agreed to amendments that do not name the non-profit but describe it among similar programs. The amendments also require new teachers to commit to working in schools for five years and prohibit the third-party organizations from charging fees to districts to place the new teachers. Teach for America charges $4,300 to place each candidate.
Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell, D-Long Beach, said the bill is not necessarily targeting Teach for America as much as it is calling for a five-year commitment.
Hardy said the five-year requirement “is both unenforceable and an infringement on people’s right to choose their profession.”
Some committee members expressed concerns about how districts would fill vacancies if they were prohibited from tapping into programs such as Teach for America. However, a few said they supported the amendment that would require the intern teachers to make a five-year commitment, saying it’s important to create a stable teacher pipeline.
Emma LaPlante, 23, who also got her start with Teach For America, is a teacher for mild to moderate special education students at Frick Impact Academy in Oakland.
LaPlante said the answer to the need for fully qualified teachers is not doing away with Teach For America slots immediately. “What’s the contingency plan when all the vacant (teaching) spots are not filled?”
She urged legislators to consider a 10-year plan to expand options for local residents to enter teacher pipeline programs.
Experienced teachers are frequently lacking in low-income schools because charter schools and districts with teachers’ unions are often prevented from transferring veteran teachers by their union contracts. Teachers have the right to remain in a school after they are permanently placed there, although those with the least seniority can be involuntarily transferred out based on declining enrollment or other factors.
Veteran teachers often prefer to work in more affluent schools where parents raise money for extras, staff turnover is low, students face fewer challenges in their lives, said Demetrio Gonzalez, president of the United Teachers of Richmond union in West Contra Costa Unified. Gonzalez, whose first teaching job was with Teach for America, and his union are taking a watch position on the bill to see what happens next.
The union in West Contra Costa is proposing that no educator in the first three years of teaching be placed at Stege Elementary in Richmond where nearly all the children are low-income and the district has embarked on a redesign of the school. The union also proposes that veteran educators be paid additional stipends of $30,000 to work there during a lengthened school year.
Josh Pechthalt, president of the California Federation of Teachers, said smaller class sizes would also help attract veteran teachers to low-income schools.
“Generally, more veteran teachers, if they have a choice, they’re going to teach in schools where conditions are better,” he said.
Pechthalt said the CFT supports the bill because kids in struggling communities often need more help than those in affluent communities and a few weeks of preparation before entering a classroom is not enough. The California NAACP, in a statement, said the state’s lowest-income children should not “be taught by individuals with exceedingly limited training and no long-term commitment to the classroom, schools and communities.”
Loyola Marymount professor Edmundo Litton told the Assembly committee that the college’s teacher credentialing program, which partners with five districts for Teach for America, is one of the most rigorous in the state. It provides classroom support and helps schools staff hard-to-fill positions in science, math, special education and bilingual education, he said.
“This fails to acknowledge the positive impact of their work,” Litton said.
To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSource’s no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.
We welcome your comments. All comments are moderated for civility, relevance and other considerations. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.
Joe 4 years ago4 years ago
Ok, Teach for America has issues. But it's at least a relatively dedicated stable teacher assigned for the entire year. I've only been teaching 11 years, and I've seen TFA and other new teachers come and go. However, I'd take an entrenched, relatively committed TFA teacher over a continuous string of subs. Not to disparage subs, but routine and stability are hugely important for these types of classes, and a sub has … Read More
Ok, Teach for America has issues. But it’s at least a relatively dedicated stable teacher assigned for the entire year. I’ve only been teaching 11 years, and I’ve seen TFA and other new teachers come and go. However, I’d take an entrenched, relatively committed TFA teacher over a continuous string of subs. Not to disparage subs, but routine and stability are hugely important for these types of classes, and a sub has a much easier means of getting to a “better school” if they’re fed up with the class.
Mike Trinida 4 years ago4 years ago
AB 221 does not provide a solution. The better alternatives are. affordable housing, better pay, programs, for all teachers and for new college graduates “willing to serve as teachers.”3rd party institutions should be giving more incentives instead of adding more roadblocks such as this AB 221 bill.
Credential Teacher 4 years ago4 years ago
Principals in these district want a larger paycheck, so they don’t hire credentialed teachers; the shortage is a lie by admin, to get more for oneself at the expense of the students, fully credential teachers and community. It’s about money and power – fire the bad admin.
Mark 4 years ago4 years ago
This bill should include real world solutions to staffing if they're going to take away an option that provides teachers. I agree with a lot of what this bill says, but if Teach For America goes away as an option for these struggling districts, then what is the alternative? This bill says students in struggling schools need good teachers, but then takes away a tool used to staff when no one qualified wants … Read More
This bill should include real world solutions to staffing if they’re going to take away an option that provides teachers. I agree with a lot of what this bill says, but if Teach For America goes away as an option for these struggling districts, then what is the alternative? This bill says students in struggling schools need good teachers, but then takes away a tool used to staff when no one qualified wants to work there.
This bill is the equivalent of stating that putting out fires with a bunch of volunteers throwing buckets of water is inefficient and that communities deserve fully trained, properly equipped fire departments. It then bans using buckets to put out fires without providing for professional fire departments. The legislator then shrugs and says: “Good luck with that fire.”
Administrators in these schools struggle to staff given high cost of living, low salaries, and challenging conditions. They are figuratively fighting a fire of empty classrooms every summer as they prepare for Fall. It is an emergency every year in many districts. This bill doesn’t help them get good teachers in the district and instead stops them from getting any teacher. The alternative won’t be a fully qualified teacher. The alternative will be a different sub every day or no one. It is detached, bureaucratic, and will make things worse, not better. That is, unless there is some massive, targeting funding attached to this bill that I did not red about.
CarolineSF 4 years ago4 years ago
Teach for America was specifically designed for its recruits to be temps. The original plan was that they would devote two years or so to service, along the lines of the Peace Corps. Then they would take the understanding they'd gained (of low-income children's needs; of the needs in public education) with them as they moved on to their permanent careers. Though Teach for America has drawn massive praise and vast amounts of philanthropic money, … Read More
Teach for America was specifically designed for its recruits to be temps. The original plan was that they would devote two years or so to service, along the lines of the Peace Corps. Then they would take the understanding they’d gained (of low-income children’s needs; of the needs in public education) with them as they moved on to their permanent careers.
Though Teach for America has drawn massive praise and vast amounts of philanthropic money, it has also been hit with criticism for the implication that it promotes the notion that low-income children deserve only temp teachers with a five-week crash course, something privileged people would never tolerate in their kids’ schools.
So TFA responded by shifting to telling its story differently, with the emphasis on members who stay longer in the classroom. And presumably its message TO its members has shifted, so it’s no longer promoting purely a temp commitment. It has also worked to shed the image of the white savior blessed with Ivy League magic that it originally promoted, recruiting more members of color.
Criticism of the notion that underprivileged children deserve only teachers with a five-week crash course has persisted, however — again, something privileged parents would never tolerate in their kids’ schools. And critics feel that TFA shoudn’t get a pass for promoting inequity in the initial design.
Journalistic reports on controversy over Teach for America should make all those facts clear, or it really isn’t evident what the issues are.
Cindy 4 years ago4 years ago
Teaching needs to be more attractive in pay and support. Otherwise there will be shortages from now on.
Stephanie Carlon 4 years ago4 years ago
Districts don’t hire experienced teachers because they’re broke and they don’t want to pay us our years! It’s all about the money! And yes I’ve been told they won’t interview me because I wasn’t a student teacher!
Jillian Valdez 4 years ago4 years ago
Easy fix is for TFA to require a 5 year commitment. I am a former TFA corps member who has been teaching 8 years now I joined TFA at 28, older than most corps members. I don’t see the problem with expanding the commitment. The classroom should not be a place for Ivy League kids to figure out their next steps. If you want to be a lawyer or a Doctor go do that. Our … Read More
Easy fix is for TFA to require a 5 year commitment. I am a former TFA corps member who has been teaching 8 years now I joined TFA at 28, older than most corps members. I don’t see the problem with expanding the commitment. The classroom should not be a place for Ivy League kids to figure out their next steps. If you want to be a lawyer or a Doctor go do that. Our kids deserve more than a bunch of 22 year olds figuring things out only to leave after 2 years.
Chris 4 years ago4 years ago
The legislature has no interest in teacher quality or maldistribution of teachers but the tiny percentage of teachers from alternative credentialing programs deserves the full treatment? So transparently political. Shame.
el 4 years ago4 years ago
I get the idea here but I think this is creating a complicated regulatory solution to a problem and is unlikely to solve it. Having sat on many an interview panel, sometimes there are reasons that districts actively recruit and choose particular young/intern teachers. I think this is a choice best made at the local level with the specific candidate in front of them, rather than by arms' length rules from Sacramento. Schools know best if … Read More
I get the idea here but I think this is creating a complicated regulatory solution to a problem and is unlikely to solve it.
Having sat on many an interview panel, sometimes there are reasons that districts actively recruit and choose particular young/intern teachers. I think this is a choice best made at the local level with the specific candidate in front of them, rather than by arms’ length rules from Sacramento. Schools know best if they can support a young teacher and can make their own judgements over who is more likely to be a strong, permanent addition to the staff. They also know who the other choices are in their hiring pool.
Compelling someone to stay 5 years by contract seems like a terrible answer. A classroom is never going to be better when it is led by someone who does not want to be there. And some of these recruits are going to find out that teaching really isn’t a good fit for them.
Instead what we need is enough pay so that teachers can afford to live where they work and be comfortable that they can pay their bills, and enough job security such that districts aren’t churning their newest employees out every time the budget sneezes or enrollment declines. These are key reasons why students aren’t enrolling in teacher training programs. Give teachers a professional working environment where they feel successful and confident both personally and professionally and they’ll stay.