Teachers' Subject Area Competence

Teacher hiring favors multiple subject (general) certification rather than single subject competence. Historically general certification was typical for elementary grades. Junior and senior high schools favored subject area specialization. The advent of budget constraints, the change of state certification laws, the middle school philosophy, and administrator preference for the adaptive styles of elementary teachers has weighted hiring towards general certifications up through the middle school now. General certification makes staffing classes easier when cost cutting causes reassignment of teachers.

I would argue that the pendulum has swung too far away from subject area competence in teacher hiring. Teacher training colleges typically do not enable quality subject area competence across several core subjects. Poor performance in math and science for a large fraction of students is in part caused by weak subject competence by teachers. High school faculty being the only group where subject competence is still predominant has left high schools with the burden of fixing student skill deficiencies from the lower grades.

A question is, do you grow the subject area competence of teachers or replace them?

Do you think there are people in the job market with both the human skills to work with our under-achieving average student and the subject expertise to make a significant improvement?

What are your views on justice for the teachers who have made a career of teaching and followed what was accepted as good professional training in the past?

The choice to grow or replace has student education and financial costs that are not visible in any voter discussions or school leadership strategic plans.

by Allen Wilkinson, Cleveland Heights