Like so much else in the world of teacher preparation, progress at readying new teachers for vastly different K-12 content expectations can probably best be described by one adjective: inconsistent.
There are already a huge range of traditional and non-traditional teaching preparation/certification programs, each with its own particular view on education, curriculum, content requirements, geographic differences, and demographic makeup. If we add to that complication a recent and much-politicized issue like the Common Core State Standards, it is easy to see how increased inconsistency would abound.
More specifically on Common Core, there are those faculty members committed to revising courses and syllabi to reflect the Common Core State Standards, those still sorting through what the standards mean for training, and those who resist the call to orient preparation around them.
Even for the early adopters, the standards pose some vexing questions: What does “alignment”—a vague concept to begin with—mean for educator preparation?
Theoretically, states could have a large influence on the preparation of teachers to teach with the Common Core standards through their preparation programs because state education boards hold the authority of program approval and certification. But realistically, states do not monitor every program on a yearly basis, so this form of accountability would take years in a best case scenario.
Ultimately, most programs seem to be taking a realistic approach that seeks to prepare its students for the demands of the current teaching profession, even if not all of the professors favor Common Core. In most states, this means teaching with the Common Core. Faculty must rise to the demands of their states and the needs of their students.
For more information, please visit: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/04/23/29cc-preparation.h33.html
