[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 119 (Tuesday, September 14, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1863]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         TEACHERS' CREDENTIALS

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR.

                              of tennessee

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 14, 1999

  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, many small colleges are unfortunately in a 
struggle to survive today. Let us suppose a very possible hypothetical 
situation in which a college professor with a Ph.D. and 20 years of 
teaching experience loses his or her job because a college closes down.
  Today, that professor, even with a Ph.D. and many years of teaching 
experience, could not teach in the public schools--this in the face of 
a teachers shortage.
  It makes no sense whatsoever hat someone with great education, 
experience, or success in a particular field should not be allowed to 
teach because of not having taken a few education courses.
  A degree in education should be a plus in favor of hiring a teacher. 
But lack of an education degree should not prevent a well-qualified 
person from being hired as a teacher.
  I would like to call to the attention of my colleagues and other 
readers of the Record the following article by Jeanne Etkins from the 
September 2 issue of the Christian Science Monitor.

                       Teachers vs. ``Educators''

       American students bottom-out on international math and 
     science tests and too many need remedial reading and writing 
     classes in college.
       One important reason is that we easily accept credentialed 
     educators over effective teachers. Too many unprepared 
     graduates are allowed to become ``educators.'' Teaching is 
     one of America's most important professions and yet our 
     education bureaucracy--high on credentialism and low on pay--
     makes it difficult for well-educated people to become 
     teachers.
       Instead of making it easier for better teachers to enter 
     the profession, our solution to our problems is too often to 
     dumb down, not wise up. For example, we gave A's and B's to 
     two-thirds of the nations eight-graders, even though many are 
     unprepared to handle high school. We ``re-center'' SAT scores 
     to obscure declining student abilities. And we grant college 
     diplomas--and teaching degrees--to people who haven't 
     mastered high school material. (Tell me, who hasn't heard 
     about that 60 percent failure rate on the Massachusetts 
     teacher's entrance exam?)
       Although students, teachers, and school administrators 
     clearly don't make the grade, taxpayers spend a fortune on 
     education--$565 billion, in federal, state, and local funds, 
     in 1997. And yet, the United Way estimates states and 
     businesses shell out $20 billion annually to teach employees 
     and college students fundamental literacy skills. A very big 
     reason for this is that we invest in good ``educators'' not 
     good teachers.
       People serious about a subject don't major in education. 
     Scientists major in science, historian study history, and 
     mathematicians focus on math. If people are really serious, 
     they earn graduate degrees.
       So why aren't more of these experts teaching our children? 
     Because a BA in education qualifies teachers, but an MA or 
     even a PhD in any other field does not.
       Furthermore, adding college teaching to a doctorate won't 
     get the most persistent teacher-wannabe a job in a public 
     school. We don't ``certify'' people to teach unless they've 
     taken education theory courses, no matter how knowledgeable 
     they are in academic areas.
       Not that every expert in a field is going to teach well--
     but it's not a far-fetched notion that someone who loves and 
     understands a subject can ignite a student's interest in it.
       How many brilliant people with graduate degrees do you 
     think are willing to sacrifice $20,000 and an additional two 
     years on education courses in order to land a $25,000 per 
     year teaching job? Not many, and the number is smaller if you 
     consider that we refuse to pay higher starting salaries to 
     career-changers who may have spent years working in their 
     fields.
       Noncompetitive salaries and unreasonable requirements 
     discourage professionals and capable college graduates from 
     entering teaching.
       Even the most dedicated teachers already in the profession 
     bail out because of other reasons--overcrowded classrooms and 
     disrespectful students. One out of 5 teachers--many of the 
     best--began abandoning the profession in 1991 for more 
     rewarding careers, according to the US Department of 
     Education. Can we really blame them? All too often we demand 
     they tolerate students whose abusive language and disruptive 
     behavior in the classroom prevent teaching and would surely 
     get them locked up or expelled from any church, store, 
     library, or theater.
       ``Teaching is rewarding, but the pay is lousy'' is fast 
     becoming ``Teaching is unrewarding, and the pay is lousy.'' 
     It's no wonder that the best and the brightest rarely go into 
     teaching, and when they do, few stay. It's time to reverse 
     this dangerous trend.
       We will save money and graduate smarter kids when we make 
     it easier for motivated, knowledgeable professionals to make 
     the transition into teaching. They don't need to be 
     credentialed to start the job. There's no reason we should be 
     able to train defense employees on the job--to program 
     ballistic missiles, for goodness sake--but not teachers.
       Don't misunderstand, though. Paying teachers competitive 
     starting salaries and hiring more academic experts won't 
     guarantee a Lake Wobegon society. Every student is not 
     ``above average,'' regardless of the number of A's and B's 
     teachers are encouraged to pass out.
       But our chance for improving public schools rises 
     dramatically when we make it easier, not more difficult, for 
     the right people to become teachers.
       Well-educated people want to teach.
       Are we wise enough to let them into the classrooms? Will we 
     pay what it takes to keep them there?

     

                          ____________________