The New York Times editorial board offers strong words today in support of Teach for America, pointing to an Urban Institute study that found in North Carolina, high school students taught by TFA members scored “slightly better” than those taught by much more experienced educators. The study’s authors attribute this to the higher test scores of the TFA teachers themselves, and the fact that they mostly attended selective colleges.

But there’s a catch — the gap was observed only in math and science. Many TFA teachers also leave the classroom quickly; after three years, almost half are out of the profession. As such, TFA hasn’t really cracked the code for system-wide reform of teacher recruitment, education, and retention. That would require so much more across the board, starting with higher pay, bonuses for teaching in low income communities, stronger state or even federal standards for teacher education, and training and testing to make sure that educators have real depth of knowledge in the subjects they teach. TFA, with its 6,000 young teachers nationwide — most of whom will eventually go onto other careers — is an interesting model that highlights the importance of attracting intelligent, motivated people to the profession. But ultimately, it is just a band-aid solution to our teaching crisis.

Dana Goldstein

Dana Goldstein, a former associate editor and writer at the Prospect, comes from a family of public-school educators. She received the Spencer Fellowship in Education Journalism, a Schwarz Fellowship at the New America Foundation, and a Puffin Foundation Writing Fellowship at the Nation Institute. Her journalism is regularly featured in Slate, The Atlantic, The Nation, The Daily Beast, and other publications, and she is a staff writer at the Marshall Project.