Columbia's Levine calls education leadership 'appalling'

In a scathing report released in March, a highly respected educator condemns his own field for failing to graduate leaders who can effectively run K-12 schools, and warns that when the majority of education leadership programs register as “inadequate to appalling,” as his report indicates, it is inevitable that the government step in and take over.

“The conclusions are sad,” says Arthur Levine, author of the report and president of Columbia University’s Teachers College. “The majority of the 600 programs to prepare school leaders were the weakest programs found in America’s education system today.”

Accusing universities of using education programs as poorly funded “cash cows” to finance more-favored departments, Levine says his four-year study (a survey of deans, faculty, alumni and principals as well as case studies of 28 schools of education) found that most dispense degrees like “green stamps, which can be traded in for raises and promotions, to teachers who have no intention of becoming administrators.” Faculty, disproportionately adjunct and including as many as five times more part-time professors as full-time, are called “ineffective” by alumni, and full-time instructors are disconnected to practice. Levine found that just 6 percent have ever served as principals.

The report, “Educating School Leaders” (www.edschools.org/pdf/Final313.pdf), also found low admission standards. GRE scores among education leadership students dipped 46 points below the national average on the verbal portion and 81 points below on the quantitative section, registering second to last by intended field of study. The curriculum is “incoherent,” a “random grab bag” of survey courses that do not address the nitty-gritty of what it takes to be a school leader. And while programs mouth praise for clinical instruction, few follow through effectively.

Perhaps most damning: 89 percent of education leadership program alumni say the schools failed to adequately prepare them for classroom realities.

Levine calls for redesigning the degrees granted in education leadership, introducing a rigorous master’s in education administration and dropping the doctorate in education (Ed.D.), which, he says, is ill-defined and in many cases a back-door method of boosting a university with a doctoral program.

The report mirrors many of the conclusions of AFT’s K-16 teacher education task force in its 2000 report, Building a Profession: Strengthening Teacher Preparation and Induction. “Unfortunately, not much has changed since we called for greater attention to issues like raising student standards and building a core curriculum in pedagogy,” says AFT higher education director Larry Gold.

While Levine worries about government intrusion at universities, he differentiates between “freedom” and “license.” “Government has a responsibility when universities fail to step in,” he says. “I would love to see states tell education schools in three years we’re going to close down every education school in this state” unless improvements are made. Levine recommends confronting boards of trustees with the report’s findings and points out that state legislators also could be an instrument of change.