For-profit, online colleges have been ramping up the development and execution of alternative teacher certification programs over the past couple of years. The state of Texas, particularly, has seen a dramatic rise in the number of for-profit alternative certification programs. These programs, lasting from three months to two years, “are booming despite little more than anecdotal evidence of their success,” write Morgan Smith and Nick Pandolfo in a recent New York Times article.
Career changers, who bring valuable life experiences with them to the classroom, are particularly drawn to these types of programs. But how will that experience translate to the realities of teaching, particularly in high-poverty school districts, where most will end up?
Over 110 alternative certification programs, including non-profit Teach for America, train 40% of all new teachers in Texas, and for-profits dominate this market. While all training programs have seen declines since 2003, the for-profit alternative programs have grown by 23%. The largest program, IteachTexas, is the first non-university based, for-profit program to expand (as IteachU.S.) across state lines. Programs exist in both Louisiana and Tennessee, and will be opening operations in Michigan and two other states soon.
Texas has been using alternative certification programs since the 1980s, when “the state didn’t regulate who was operating private programs, and people saw that was a way to make a fast buck,” according to Rae Queen, president of the Texas Alternative Certification Association. The state now has more rigorous application and auditing process for certification programs and has instituted a minimum GPA requirement for all teacher candidates regardless of their path to certification.
The expansion of for-profit programs has been met with criticism in the education world. “The for-profits will take anyone,” said a director of a nonprofit teacher certification program, regardless of demand. Traditional programs, along with university-affiliated alternative certification programs, tend to restrict their enrollment based on the level of demand for particular grades or subject areas in nearby districts.
As for quality of new teachers from these programs, principals have mixed opinions. Many agree they succeed at the same rate as traditionally certified teachers, but others say they seem less prepared. Graduates of for-profit, non-college based programs also have mixed feelings. One graduate reflects that while the online format of the program worked with her schedule, it did not support her once she entered the classroom. “I remember thinking that I wanted constructive criticism and I wasn’t getting it.”
Evaluating teacher training programs is a complex task. So far, says Rep. Rob Eissler of the Texas House of Representatives, it is not clear that for-profit programs have worse track records for preparing teachers than traditional certification programs. There is a lack of research, and most of what is known is anecdotal.
To read more, please visit http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/us/for-profit-certification-for-teachers-in-texas-is-booming.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=education&adxnnlx=1322530259-2lD6BLC5lPVS/lWG3f+xTQ
