More Thoughts on Attrition

Comments

how about the fact that it is sometimes difficult to see or measure actual impact?

Obviously there are situations where a student tells a teacher that they have made a difference, or state test results come back with through-the-roof performance... but on the whole, its tough to step back and really measure output like most other professions. Our commodity is not a physical object, and its certainly not rated in monetary value.

Because there is no concrete "final product", and because the "raw materials," as Dr. Mullins described them, come in at all different levels, it is not always clear what has and has not been accomplished (especially in the long-term).

If you can't see what impact you are making, and you do not have the benefit of money or gratitude to keep you plugging on in spite of this.... why do you stay?
i had intended to respond to the first blog about attrition but starting drafting an email response and never finished... robbie's comment about the numbers who are no longer teaching was one of the first comments i was going to make. once the first few quit/are released/etc, fellow mtc'ers do not feel like they would be outcasts, etc if they, too, quit.

when mtc recruits top-notch applicants, we (the applicants) are used to being at the top. i think that the point about leaving the profession because of admin is absolutely true. the level of people who are interested in mtc (and accepted to be a part of mtc), at least in my own opinion, are used to having their voiced heard, their comments/suggestions appreciated, etc. when we sit in oxford, we can dream and scheme about a million and two ways that we could improve the system. instead of just venting, the people attracted to mtc are the people who will go out and act on the suggestions for improvement we discuss with each other on a regular basis.

once i can figure out how i want to best articulate my thoughts, i will add more...
Updated to reflect that point.
Oh yeah...about something you said in a previous post, having a more rigorous recruitment process and getting folks from the Dukes and Harvards and U Chicagos and Princetons of the world doesn't mean you'll get better, more committed or more effective teachers. It just means you'll compete with TFA for the same programs more closely.

I think that getting the best people for the job--not the best on paper--should be MTC's focus. The schools we're in, the students we deal with, the stress of first-year (or second-year) teaching have nothing to do with elite educations or a highly competitive admissions process to MTC.

I also think that a contributing factor to attrition is that many of the people who enter MTC are pretty well-rounded, active, sociable, and smart folk. We could get jobs in many places and sometimes see that the grass is greener (and the work is EASIER) on the other side of the fence. On the flip side of this, I honestly (perhaps elitely) feel that if many of the teachers at my school didn't teach they'd...uh...yeah....

I think that getting the best people for the job--not the best on paper--should be MTC's focus.

I agree, of course. But that leads to this question: What should be the focus in an applicant?


Post a comment

Already a Vox member? Sign in