This February, Teach For America begins its third decade of operations and its fourth year in the Twin Cities. Roughly 10 percent of graduating seniors at Macalester and Carleton Colleges have applied, as well as 3 percent of those at the University of Minnesota.
Depending on whom you side with, that's cause for either celebration or despair.
Reformers praise TFA for recruiting the nation's top college students to teach in underserved urban and rural schools. The participants make a minimum commitment of two years and, according to TFA, often stay on longer.
The education establishment, meanwhile, has shouted itself hoarse about the fact that TFA places undertrained teachers in already disadvantaged schools. It's harmful, they argue, to our most vulnerable children.
So who's right?
Both sides frantically wave data in support of their cases. But poring over the research yields no definitive or powerful findings. The average TFA corps member is either slightly more, or slightly less, effective than the average newly licensed teacher. Ho-hum.
And why should that be surprising? Even though licensed teachers receive far more training, they often come from the bottom third of their graduating classes.
TFA recruits, by contrast, come from estimable colleges where they collectively maintain an A- average. But some of them have never set foot in a public school before; they could all use a bit more of an apprenticeship experience, and many never finish their two-year service commitments.