![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Novice teachers in the United States, unlike their peers in most other professions, are expected to assume responsibilities similar to veteran teachers with considerable experience. Moreover, given the highly isolated nature of their work, teachers are less likely than those in most other professions to benefit from the informal types of training and mentoring opportunities that come from working in proximity to colleagues, observing and being observed in one's professional practice. Consequently, teachers often learn by trial and error, without systematic feedback or instructive conversations with more knowledgeable colleagues, and early coping strategies, sometimes developed in response to classroom management difficulties, may become entrenched teaching styles. The first year of teaching may be overwhelming for the novice. Many find the early years frustrating and discouraging and simply leave the profession. It has been estimated that 30 percent leave during the first 2 years, and that nearly half of those who begin teaching will resign by their sixth or seventh year. Overall teacher attrition thereafter is about 6 percent each year (Huling-Austin 1990).
Concerns about the role of first-year teachers and their continuing need for training have lead to a rapid growth of formal "induction" programs, cited as "one of the fastest growing educational movements in recent history" (Huling-Austin 1990, p. 538). Induction programs provide a planned program of systematic and sustained assistance throughout the first year of teaching. In a 1990-91 national teacher survey, 48 percent of teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience had participated in an induction program, compared with only 28 percent of those with 4 to 8 years of experience (USED 1993c). Teachers were progressively less likely to have had the opportunity to participate in such a program the longer they had been teaching.
Induction programs generally aim to improve both performance and attitudes, with a goal of greater retention of promising teachers. Because they are also designed to transmit the culture of the particular school and system in which the teacher will work, some induction programs may include all teachers who are new to a school, even if they have experience elsewhere.
The conceptual basis for induction programs is as diffuse as that of student teaching, with varying emphases on support, socialization, adjustment, evaluation, and training. Although program components vary widely, teachers often attend orientation meetings prior to the start of the school year, are given handbooks and other printed material, receive observation and consultation about their teaching, and attend group meetings or seminars.
One of the greatest criticisms of existing induction programs is that they overemphasize evaluation rather than support, a problem that is exacerbated by certification requirements in certain states. A recent review of induction programs summarized a series of other problems, such as fostering of competition, attempts to do too much within the programs, neglect of teachers' needs, and an increasingly custodial orientation (Lawson 1992).
Professional development for teachers proceeds both informally and formally. Both the isolation of the work and the number of hours that U.S. teachers are scheduled to teach work against the informal collegiality and mentoring that may exist among teachers in other countries. As noted in America's Teachers (USED 1993a):
The isolation of classroom work has been commented upon by a number of researchers who study teachers and their work. Teachers have less contact with their peers than do many other professionals. In fact, some classroom teachers rarely communicate with other adults during the workday, and even fewer teachers frequently consult with peers or supervisors concerning professional challenges. (p. 128)
The average teacher who teaches in a department is responsible for five periods per day, an arrangement that allows little time or opportunity for professional interaction. As Louis (1992) concluded from results of a study of teachers' work, "What mattered most to teachers was a resource—time—that was, either by policy or by practice, within the discretion of the school. Time was important because it was the backbone for staff development and collaborative work efforts" (p. 150). In a study of teachers' work, Johnson (1990) noted that collegial interactions were pushed to the margins of the workday, such as before and after school and during supervision of recess, which led to superficial exchanges, adding that "virtually never did schools reserve adequate time to encourage teachers' continuing collaboration or convey the organizational message that time spent with colleagues was legitimate and would likely improve teaching and schooling" (p. 149).
Common planning time for elementary teachers of the same grade is viewed as a costly luxury in many districts, though it has been said to be critical. Sharing at least one preparation period a week is necessary to allow teachers to engage in ongoing conversations about curriculum, the needs of individual students, and the best way to coordinate resources. This is also a time for teachers to share ideas about instructional practices and discuss any difficulties they may be experiencing in their classrooms (Honig 1992, p. 58).
Numerous efforts to make teaching more public often include planned peer observations and discussions, and the designation of teacher leadership roles such as master teacher or lead teacher. Classroom observation among teachers has been called a "bellwether practice," with Little (1988) noting that "a school culture is conducive to leadership by teachers when teachers are in one another's classrooms for purposes of seeing, learning from, commenting on, and planning for one another's work with students" (p. 87).
Additional organized efforts at professional development exist, as teachers are usually required to continue their education through "inservice" training or graduate study. In a 1988 study, one-third of teachers reported spending 30 or more hours in some form of professional education in the previous 2 years (USED 1993a). These efforts may be a condition for continued certification and are often tied to financial incentives on the salary scales. Public school contracts typically include raises for completed graduate study.
While virtually all teachers in the United States have bachelor's degrees, nearly half (46 percent) of all teachers currently in the work force also have master's degrees, most of which were earned after the teachers began their careers (USED 1993a). In many states, teachers are expected to attend evening classes or summer school in order to obtain credits toward a master's degree, required for full certification. In New York, for example, beginning teachers are awarded provisional certification and then can obtain permanent certification within 5 years, if they receive a master's degree, complete 2 years of full-time experience in the classroom, and pass required tests. Current proposals under review in New York ("Improving Teacher Competence" 1994) would eliminate this system and require that licenses be renewed every 3 years, based on satisfactory evaluations of performance and continued education and training.
Compared to other professions, however, in teaching, formal opportunities for professional growth are negligible, and little guidance is provided about particular paths of study or career development. In a study of 115 experienced teachers from 27 school districts, Johnson (1990) concluded that "teachers who sought to fashion a career out of their teaching experience had to set their own goals and celebrate their own progress, for there were virtually no milestones set out by the school along the way" (p. 249).
The primary means by which most teachers continue their professional development is through staff development activities at the school or district level. In California, for example, 8 days for staff development are available annually to most schools, although most use only 2 to 4 days per year (Honig 1992). Controversy exists over the perceived differences between "inservice training" and "staff development," with concerns that the inservice approach has too often been reactive, problem oriented, and remedial in nature, and that it has been handed down from the district without regard for teachers' perceptions of their own professional needs. The format for inservice training is generally a workshop format with experts lecturing on single topics. These topics vary widely and often include social concerns regarding students, such as drug abuse education or suicide prevention; administrative concerns, such as testing; and curricular developments in various fields.
Johnson (1990) reported that teachers described inservice training as "a haphazard sequence of speeches and workshops addressing unrelated topics" (p. 254), and noted that "remarkably few sessions addressed teachers' concerns about their teaching" (p. 255). Programs that get high marks from teachers are more likely to be those that engage teachers in the planning and conducting of sessions, can be easily adapted for direct application in the classroom, and which have some means of follow-up.
In addition to inservice or staff development activities at the school or district level, some teachers attend workshops and conferences away from school. However, districts vary widely in providing release time for these out-of-school experiences. The California Elementary Grades Task Force recommended that a more judicious use of staff development time than the current workshop approach would be "to provide a complete day a month for teachers . . . to work together with colleagues on practical questions of application" (Honig 1992, p. 58).
Supervision and evaluation provide another means for teacher development—practices that have received considerable attention since the reform proposals of the 1980s. Previously, it was common for teachers to receive little or no supervision during their careers. For example, a 1985 study by Blankenship and Irvine of experienced teachers in Georgia found that 50 percent had never been observed for purposes of improving instruction and 80 percent had not received peer supervision (as cited in Glickman and Bey 1990). In the past decade, public school districts have invested widely in improving the practice of supervising and evaluating teachers, and a number of states now mandate systematic evaluation of teachers' work. The new movement toward better supervision of teachers has in many cases assumed that part of the principal's role is to effectively supervise and improve teaching practice, although supervision is also performed by a variety of other professionals in the schools, such as assistant principals, department heads, lead teachers, mentor teachers, and peers.
The current practice of teacher supervision is not always favorably received by teachers. In many schools, teachers perceive that the process provides little opportunity for learning and improvement and is largely evaluative. Supervision that includes clear criteria and enables individuals to set their own goals for improvement are favored by teachers (Johnson 1990).
As of the 1990-91 report on schools and staffing (USED 1993c), there were 2.9 million teachers and 103,000 principals in the United States. Of the teachers, 73 percent were female, 87 percent were white, and 8 percent were black. Among principals, 65 percent were male and 88 percent white. As has been widely noted, the predominance of white teachers and principals contrasts strongly with a student body of increasing minority membership. Of the 44.8 million students in K-12 schools, 70 percent are white, 15 percent are black, 11 percent are Hispanic, 3 percent are Asian, and 1 percent are Native American (USED 1993c). Half of the schools in the country reported having no minority teachers among their staff.
Also of serious concern is the declining number of minority students preparing to become teachers. Between 1975 and 1985, the number of bachelor's degrees in education awarded to black students decreased by two-thirds, compared with a decrease by one-half in degrees awarded to white students (Darling-Hammond 1990). Moreover, many graduates with education degrees do not teach immediately or at all, and this is disproportionately true of degree recipients from minority groups. In 1985, 74 percent of those who received bachelor's degrees in education applied for jobs, and only about half of those who got degrees actually began teaching; just 38 percent of the minority candidates awarded degrees that year took full-time teaching positions (Darling-Hammond 1990).
The average age of teachers has been slowly rising, reaching 41 in 1991, as has the average years of teaching experience, reported at 15 years in 1991 (USED 1993c). Only 1 percent of those teaching in the United States have less than a bachelor's degree, while 46 percent have at least a master's degree. Among principals, 9 percent have less than a master's degree as their highest degree, 58 percent have a master's degree, and 33 percent have completed additional study beyond the master's level. Nearly all school principals (98.7 percent) had been teachers before becoming principals, with an average of 10.6 years of experience.
In 1990-91, the average salary for full-time teachers was $29,987 (USED 1993c). This figure varied by locale. Average salaries were highest in urban fringe areas or large towns ($34,935), followed by central city areas ($32,202), and were lowest in rural areas or small towns ($27,748).
Teachers' pay across the country can be determined by either a salary schedule or by merit pay, but the salary schedule is clearly predominant, with reported use in 94 percent of all public school districts (USED 1993c). Salary schedules are often negotiated among representatives of the board of education, administrators, and teacher representatives. These schedules then apply to all teachers in the district, K-12, with pay rising gradually for experience and education. Across the United States in 1991, the starting salary for those with a bachelor's degree was $19,913, compared with $21,698 for those with a master's degree. The average salary for the highest step across all public school districts was $36,065. These figures vary widely by region, however, averaging $43,846 for the highest step on the schedule in the Northeast and $31,382 in the South. The averages in the West and Midwest were $37,798 and $33,794, respectively. Averaged across the nation, a teacher with 20 years of experience and a master's degree earned an average of $33,199 in 1991; public school principals earned a mean salary of $49,603 (USED 1993c).
Salary schedules are uniform, predictable, and easy to administer. Raises are virtually automatic. Merit pay, which requires an evaluation of teaching performance and an overall assessment of a teacher, necessitates a formulation of criteria for this process and the training of evaluators. Merit pay is often viewed as a means of motivating improvements in instructional quality and rewarding teachers for their differential contributions in the classroom. A few states have begun to attempt some version of rewarding meritorious service, particularly through new "career ladder" programs that define career stages and distinguish performance levels.
Public school teachers in the United States are also compensated with a benefits package, in addition to their salaries. Such a package nearly always includes a pension or retirement plan (in 96 percent of the schools), guaranteeing some continued pay upon retirement, and medical insurance (86 percent); it may also include a dental plan (67 percent) and life insurance (71 percent) (USED 1993c).
With the current salary schedules, earning power may near its peak by the time a teacher is in his or her late thirties, just as peers in other professions find their earnings escalating. Not surprisingly, teachers often seek other sources of income, especially by capitalizing either on the relatively early end to the scheduled workday or on the long summer break. One-third of all teachers surveyed reported receiving additional pay for school-related duties such as coaching or sponsoring student activities (USED 1993c). A sizable portion earned money elsewhere, with a quarter employed outside school settings either in summer or during the school year; 17 percent earned additional pay either in their own or other schools, such as by teaching evening or summer classes. An additional 14 percent received funds from other sources, such as a bonus or state supplement (USED 1993c).
Teaching has been cited as the most unionized occupation in the country, with roughly 9 of 10 teachers belonging to either the National Education Association (NEA) or the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) (Johnson 1987). NEA membership is roughly three times that of the AFT.
The NEA was founded in 1857 as the National Teachers' Association, a coalition of 10 state associations whose members were interested in improving the standard for teachers via licensure controlled by teachers. By 1870, the focus was shifted to encompass a more comprehensive approach to education, which was reflected in the name change to the National Education Association. The organization was further strengthened in both size and purpose in 1966 when it merged with the American Teachers Association, an association of black teachers, founded in 1904 as the National Association of Teachers in Colored Schools. For more than a century, the NEA has had broad national influence in a variety of educational movements. Local issues were less of a concern until the 1960s, when the much smaller AFT began to mobilize teachers who wanted higher salaries and better working conditions. The NEA was restructured in 1973 in order to expand its role as advocate for the classroom teacher.
The AFT is a labor union, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor—Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). The AFT was formed in 1916 by a collection of local teachers' unions. There has long been some public resistance to teacher unionization, but as unionization of public employees in general has increased, so has membership and support for the AFT. A turning point in acceptance of the AFT was its election as the bargaining agent in 1962 for New York City school teachers.
Membership in both the NEA and the AFT soared throughout the 1960s and 1970s, a period in which states enacted collective bargaining laws that required local school boards to recognize and negotiate with local teachers' unions (Johnson 1987). Teacher contracts typically cover wages, hours, working conditions, and some issues of educational policy. Union contracts have provided teachers with formal grievance procedures, and they regulate teacher evaluation and protect job security. These contracts have had considerable impact, as well, on such educational issues as class size, daily schedules, and teacher workloads. For example, in-school preparation time, uncommon in elementary schools until the 1970s, is now provided for in many union contracts, usually entailing 45 minutes daily (Johnson 1987). An issue in some areas is who controls how that time is used, with unions arguing that it should be up to teachers.
Limits on class size are often a central concern for local unions as well. Non-teaching duties are typically addressed in contracts, and bargaining has reduced the amount of time teachers spend in supervisory roles such as lunch duty. Prior to collective bargaining, teachers were often expected to serve schools in whatever ways administrators determined; bargaining has played a significant role in delineating teacher responsibilities and defining working conditions.
The average length of the school year in the United States is 180 days, with teachers typically expected to work an additional 4 or 5 days. The work week for teachers averaged 46 hours in 1991, with 35 of those hours spent performing required duties at school (USED 1993c). Three hours were typically spent outside school hours with students (tutoring, coaching, supervising extracurricular activities), and 8 hours were spent on school-related work without students present, such as preparing for class, grading, or holding conferences with parents.
Elementary school teachers spent about 20 hours a week in 1991 teaching the core subjects of language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science. This was 1 hour less per week than in 1988. Nearly half of this time (48 percent) was spent on English and language arts and a quarter (25 percent) on mathematics, with 15 percent of the time spent teaching social studies and 13 percent teaching science (USED 1993c). The average class size in public schools was 23 students in departmental, subject-based classes (usually at the secondary level), and 25 students in self-contained classes (most often at the elementary level).
The actual working environment of teachers is usually simply a classroom; most teachers lack an office and even a telephone—unimaginable conditions in other professions. Recent reform literature has made a wide variety of suggestions for improving the conditions of teachers' work. As noted earlier, working conditions have long been characterized as contributing to teachers' isolation and lack of autonomy and influence. Suggestions for improvement have included providing
It has been assumed that such changes will promote professionalization, create more effective schools, improve the attractiveness of teaching as a field, and lead to greater retention of teachers. In a review of the indicators of the quality of work life, Louis (1992) notes seven criteria relevant for teachers, consistent with educational reform literature: respect from relevant adults, participation in decision-making, frequent and stimulating professional interaction, frequent and accurate feedback, use of skills and knowledge, resources to carry out the job, and goal congruence.
In addition, it has been recommended that teacher professionalism would be enhanced by such obvious support mechanisms as a quiet office space; a comfortable faculty commons area in which to exchange ideas with peers; access to a telephone, word processor or computer, copying machines, and other technology; and "on-call" secretarial help. It has also been recommended that teachers have at their disposal a discretionary budget for purchasing classroom supplies and supplementary instructional materials (Honig 1992, p. 61).
The primary relationship that teachers have is with students, and only peripherally with their parents. The most common method of communication from schools to parents is through written materials, such as newsletters or flyers, which allow little opportunity for response (Tangri and Moles 1987). Face-to-face interaction with parents usually occurs during an annual schoolwide open house and during periodic teacher conferences, fairly formal occasions for discussing student progress. Teachers or parents may schedule other conferences as needed; however, these generally occur in response to student difficulty. Typically, teachers receive little or no training for their interactions with parents. Research on parent-teacher conferences suggests the need for staff training "on ways of relating to parents in a nonthreatening manner and building a sense of partnership with them" (Tangri and Moles, 1987 p. 527).
A prominent current issue in U.S. education is the degree to which teachers are expected to assume some degree of responsibility for socialization of the nation's youth. The shifting balance of home and school responsibilities has led many to question the appropriate role of schooling versus that of the family. These changes may also place further strain on the parent-teacher relationship.
The National Center for Education Statistics has regularly assessed teacher job satisfaction. In its 1991 national survey, 39 percent of all teachers reported that they definitely would become teachers if they were to make their choices again (an increase from 33 percent in 1988), and 27 percent said they "probably" would choose teaching again (USED 1993c). Most teachers plan to continue in the field, either as long as they are able (38 percent) or until they are eligible for retirement (36 percent); only 3 percent were planning to leave teaching at the time of the survey.
Teacher attrition is often affected by life cycle factors, as many teachers leave temporarily or permanently when their children are born, or after a household move. Among former public school teachers surveyed in 1991-92, 19 percent cited homemaking or child rearing as their primary occupational status (USED 1994). In that same study, it was reported that among those public school teachers who left teaching between 1990-91 and 1991-92, 15 percent expected to return in 1992-93. Teacher attrition also varies with the age of the teacher, with the highest rate of those leaving among those teachers who are 50 years old or older.
Conflicting information exists regarding reasons for leaving among those who are dissatisfied. In a 1988 study by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, of those who left to enter other fields, 60 percent cited low salaries as the reason (cited in Darling-Hammond 1990). Additional factors cited were unsatisfactory working conditions, such as lack of input and independence, lack of administrative support, and the extent of nonteaching duties. Similarly, a 1991-92 survey of teachers who had remained teaching in the same school for the previous 2 academic years found that more than half (53 percent) of the public school teachers felt that providing higher salaries or better fringe benefits would be the most effective step in encouraging teachers to remain in the field (USDE, 1994). However, among those who had left the field and who cited their dissatisfaction with teaching as a career as one of the main reasons for leaving, fewer than 1 percent attributed this dissatisfaction to poor salary. The primary reason given (25 percent) was "inadequate support from the administration." The second most common reason given (20 percent) was "poor student motivation to learn" (USED 1994).
Enrollment in teacher education programs has declined dramatically in recent years (by half between 1975 and 1985), particularly as more career opportunities opened for women in the 1970s and 1980s. Serious shortages of teachers exist, both in particular regions of the country and in certain fields, notably mathematics and science. Although enormous efforts are being made in response to the reform proposals of the 1980s to improve the quality of teacher education and the professionalization of the field, it may take time for these changes to significantly alter the professional reputation of teaching in a manner that will attract the students needed.
-###-
[Teacher Preparation and Teachers' Lives in the United States - References]