Teach for America does numerous positive things, but its structure is flawed. It’s that simple, really.
Obviously, Duke is a big Teach for America (TFA) feeder as the Class of 2011 had 53 students accepted into the program, ranking 4th for mid-sized schools after Harvard University, Boston College and Georgetown University. Approximately 16 percent of last year’s senior class, or 250 students, applied.
But there’s one number that has always stuck me about Teach for America: the number of alumni who donate time or money is currently 50 percent. This is a drastic increase from past years, but it still shows TFA is a pit stop, rather than a destination, for most who decide to enter the program.
And Duke feeds students through this pit stop, though they leave en masse after two years, leaving many school districts without a sense of continuity. These young teachers—who are lauded for their successes inside the classrooms—often move onto law or business school, fields that are more lucrative. A 2010 Wall Street Journal article cites 500 TFA alumni work in government (presumably with many working in education-related policy).
There are, however, those who move onto higher positions in the field of education. There are now 450 TFA alumni working as principals and school superintendents. There are stories of alumni who turned around school districts once they got to higher powers, and TFA lauds the idea of making serious change.
But still, Teach for America faces the challenge of retaining more of its corps members as teachers. A critical New York Times article on TFA cited Dr. Heilig and Su Jin Jez of California State University’s compilation of various studies on the program, including one that stated “by the fourth year, 85 percent of TFA teachers had left” New York City schools. TFA responded by citing a 2008 Harvard doctoral thesis, which, though stating 61 percent stayed beyond two years, cited that “few people are estimated to remain in their initial placement school or the profession beyond five or six years.”
And, to be honest, why would they stay? With the average TFA salary for a Dallas-area teacher hovering around $45,000, there aren’t incentives for students to stay beyond a brief resume boost. Why would you accept less than the median starting salary (just under $60,000 for Duke graduates) two years after starting—especially if you were a top student, someone TFA recruits?
That’s why the ground level is in constant flux. And the only way to change this problem is to figure out where TFA should go in the future.
If TFA is being honest with itself, it should realize that its incentive structure does not match its main ideology. Throughout my research, the one thing that popped up was how often TFA compares itself to the Peace Corps, especially when asking for government grants. And, honestly, why wouldn’t the program utilize a similar structure to the Peace Corps? Currently, the Peace Corps offers a stipend based on the location of volunteers and then gives a minimal allowance (approximately $8,000 pre-tax) after the 27-month stint. There are other options—travel pay, student loan deferment and even two vacation days per month of service—but the main idea is that it is a volunteering opportunity. Members get health benefits, but again they are essentially working for the idea of helping others while simultaneously getting some serious experience and resume help.
Paying $45,000 is a lame attempt to try to persuade others that this is more than just a very successful volunteering opportunity. Instead of denying tens of thousands of willing and able young people, why not restructure the program for volunteering, remove a vast majority of the pay (i.e. stipend structure) and place many more students and make a much larger impact on the education system?
Would the number of applications decrease? Definitely, but the Peace Corps has survived, and it would ensure that TFA chooses people that want to teach. Even if applications were cut in half, there would be approximately 20,000 people willing to work. The stipends would be higher for TFA members due to higher standards of living, but the number would come in below the average salary for TFA teachers. Further, a change in terminology would change incentivizing structures. The move would make the TFA experience entirely altruistic (volunteering) as opposed to a paid job. Then, the schools should take the money saved from salaries for every young person for two years and put it in a pot. Use this money to go aggressively at the best teachers—the ones with the best scores or best reviews or some sort of method—and try to retain them at higher salaries. Good teachers would get paid higher salaries by schools. It makes sense. Let those that go onto be principals be principals or those that want to go do policy do policy, but be competitive at retaining good teachers for beyond four or five or six years. Teach for America has helped start the education revolution. Now it’s time to take the next step.
Antonio Segalini is a Trinity junior. This is his final column of the semester.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.