Teacher Licensing -- A Protection Racket

Contrary to popular notions, teacher licensing in publicdone in the 1920s and 1930s as of studies in the 1980s.
schools does not insure teacher quality. A license alsoWhether measured by Scholastic Aptitude Tests,
does not even insure that a public-school teacherACT tests, vocabulary tests, reading comprehension
knows much about the subject she teaches. In fact, intests or Graduate Record Examinations, students
our upside-down public-school system, licensing oftenmajoring in education have consistently scored below
leads to ill-trained and mediocre teachers instructing ourthe national average."
children. As we will see, it turns out that teacher"At the graduate level, it is very much the same story,
licensing is a protection racket.with students in numerous other fields outscoring
The notion that only state-approved, licensed teacherseducation students on the Graduate Record
can guarantee children a good education is provenExamination--by from 91 points composite to 259
wrong by history and common sense. In ancientpoints, depending on the field. The pool of graduate
Athens, the birthplace of logic, science, philosophy, andstudents in education supplies not only teachers,
Western civilization, city authorities did not requirecounselors, and other administrators, but also
teachers to be licensed. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotleprofessors of education and other leaders and
did not have to get a teaching license from Athenianspokesmen for the education establishment."
bureaucrats to open up their Academies. A teacher'sBecause of poor teacher training, public schools often
success came only from his competence, reputation,hire ill-trained or mediocre teachers, which can cause
and popularity. Students and their parents paid auntold damage to millions of children. Parents have no
teacher only if they thought he was worth the money.recourse to oust these teachers because most
Competition and an education free market producedteachers get tenure after a few years on the job.
great teachers in ancient Greece.In contrast, in a private school, a truly incompetent
Parents in America gave their children a superiorteacher will not last long. Parents will complain, and the
education at home or in small grammar or religiousschool owner will have to fire this teacher to keep
schools for over two hundred years before we hadparents happy. Also, for the same reasons, a
public schools or licensed teachers in this country.private-school owner will make every effort to find out
School authorities' claim that teachers have to beif a teacher is competent before he hires that teacher.
licensed for our children to get a quality education, isThe school owner's livelihood and the success of his
therefore false.school depend on having competent teachers and
Today, in millions of companies across America,happy customers. Compulsory public schools can
bosses or their managers teach new employees jobignore parents, so they have no such constraints.
skills, from the simplest to the most complex. PrivateMost parents naively assume that if a teacher is
schools and trade schools teach millions of studentslicensed, he or she is now a trained professional they
valuable, practical skills. Thousands of collegeshould trust their children with. Parents therefore lower
professors with masters or doctorate degrees in thetheir guard with "licensed" teachers because they
subject they teach, instruct hundreds of thousands ofassume that a licensed teacher must be competent.
college students in subjects ranging from philosophy toAs we have seen, this is often not the case.
electrical engineering. Over a million home-schoolingOne solution offered for this problem is "merit" pay for
parents teach their children reading, writing, and mathteachers. Merit-pay programs would judge all school
with learn-to-read or learn-math books,employees on competence. Better teachers would get
computer-learning software, and other teachingpaid more, and bad teachers, principals, or
materials. All these teachers are not licensed yet theyadministrators could be fired or demoted. How one
often give children a far better education than licensedjudges merit, of course, is a whole separate issue, but
public-school teachers.just as private-school owners devise methods to
Licensing laws imply that only public-school educationjudge the merit of their teachers, so too could public
"experts" can judge a teacher's competence. Theseschools.
alleged "experts" are usually graduates of teacherYet, if teacher licensing produced competent teachers,
colleges and university education departments.why do school authorities and teachers unions fight so
Unfortunately, so-called teacher education is often anhard against merit pay? The answer seems
academic joke or waste of time, especially toobvious--the system produces many teachers,
student-teachers who have to endure years of thisprincipals, and administrators who may not "merit" their
"teacher-training" torture.pay, and might lose their jobs under merit-pay rules.
Steve Wulf, writing in Time magazine, revealed theIn effect, public-school employees say to parents: "You
opinion that many student-teachers had about theirhave to pay our salary and benefits, but how dare you
so-called teacher training:demand proof that we know how to teach your
"Six hundred experienced teachers surveyed in 1995children? How dare you judge our merit? How dare
were brutal about the education they had received,you demand that you get your money's worth?" Only
describing it as "mind-numbing," the "shabbiestemployees who think the world owes them a living are
psycho-babble," and "an abject waste of time." Theyafraid to be judged by the people who pay them. So
complained that fragmented, superficial course worklicensing does not keep charlatans out of our public
had little relevance to classroom realities. And judgingschools. Instead, it practically guarantees that we
by the weak skills of student teachers entering theiremploy charlatans or ill-trained teachers.
schools, they observed, the preparation was stillIf licensing doesn't work, what is the alternative? The
woefully inadequate."answer is, no licensing. If anyone could teach without a
Many teacher colleges don't teach crucial readinglicense, like home-schooling parents or private-school
phonics or math instruction skills, nor do they teachteachers, then millions of new, competent, creative
science or history. Many "licensed" reading, math,teachers would flood the market. These new,
history, or science teachers have not taken courses inunlicensed teachers would compete with one another
or majored in these subjects in college. One survey byand drive the price of education down, much as
the American Association of Colleges for Teachercompetition drives down the price of computers. They
Education found that more than three-quarters ofwould, hopefully, also put public schools out of business,
teacher-college graduates preparing to besince millions of parents and free-market schools
elementary-school teachers had no academic majorwould now hire these new competent, low-cost
except education.teachers.
In many teacher colleges, student-teachers don't learnWithout licensing laws, anyone with a special skill or
specific knowledge in their subject field or competentknowledge could simply put an ad in the Yellow Pages
teaching techniques to teach our kids reading, math,or their local newspaper and advertise themselves as
and science. Instead they learn the history anda tutor in English, math, biology, history, or computer
philosophy of education and other mostly uselessskills. Retired cooks, engineers, authors, plumbers,
nonsense. Also, many university educationmusicians, biologists, or businessmen who love teaching
departments waste student-teachers' time on socialist,could easily open a small school in their homes. If there
politically-correct courses about gender and minoritywere no license laws, these talented new teachers
oppression, multiculturalism studies, and other courseswould not have to worry about school authorities
that would fit right in to a Marxist curriculum in Cuba.shutting down their schools because they didn't have a
Licensing also implies that parents can't and shouldn'tlicense.
judge a teacher's competence. Yet millions of parentsHow would parents be sure they were not hiring a
in all fifty states send their children to privatecharlatan if there were no licensing laws? The same
kindergartens, grammar schools, and colleges. Theseway they judge their car mechanic, accountant, and
allegedly ignorant parents have no problem judging thechild's kindergarten teacher -- by results, reputation, and
competence of teachers in private schools, andby being careful consumers. Naturally, parents would
withdrawing their children if the schools don't live up tomake occasional mistakes in judgment because they
the parents' expectations.are human. However, they would quickly become
We judge the competence of our car mechanic,careful consumers because they would now be
accountant, and our child's private kindergarten teacherspending their hard-earned money for teachers. It is
all the time, and we do so reasonably well. Is thereamazing how fast we learn to judge the work of
some mysterious reason we can't judge whether ourothers when we have to pay for their services out of
children are learning to read, write, or do math?our own pockets. Also, if a parent does make
Public-school officials who claim that parents are toomistakes in judging an unlicensed teacher, by watching
ignorant to judge their children's education areher child's progress she will soon catch her error. At
self-serving. If we allegedly can't trust parents with thisthat point, she can quickly fire the teacher and find a
job, obviously we have to trust the so-called educationbetter one. Can a parent do that with her children's
"experts," thereby guaranteeing these so-calledpublic-school teachers?
education experts' cushy jobs.The worst nightmare for public-school authorities is a
School authorities also claim that we need licensing totrue free market of teachers who don't need a license
guarantee competence, so no charlatans becometo teach. Fierce competition by millions of new,
teachers. Yet some licensed public-schools teachersunlicensed, competent, highly-skilled people might
are barely literate themselves or are ill-trained or havedestroy public schools, the teacher unions, and
little knowledge of the subject they teach. Fred Bayles,teachers' lifetime security in tenured jobs. It might
in a "USA Today" column titled, "Those Who Can'tdestroy the licensing racket that protects their jobs.
Spell or Write, Teach," gave an example:That is one unspoken reason why school authorities
"On April 1, 1998, the Massachusetts Board offiercely defend licensing laws--real competition terrifies
Education gave applicants who wanted to teach, athem. That is also one of the best reasons to eliminate
basic reading and writing test. The results of the testlicensing.
were that 59 percent of the applicants failed. If youThe only way to insure good teachers is to let parents
think these test results made the Board of Educationdecide who will teach their children, not bureaucrats.
do something constructive, think again. It promptlyMillions of parents making individual decisions about
lowered the test's passing grade from 77 to 66who should teach their children will bring forth the best
percent. Under the "new" standard, only 44 percentteachers. Fierce competition and an education free
failed. Note that all the applicants were collegemarket would raise all boats in the teaching profession.
graduates."Teachers who want to succeed in their profession
Also, these same education students often scorewould have to prove to parent-customers or private-
lowest in academic achievement among otherschool owners that they have what it takes. They
high-school graduates. Thomas Sowell, senior fellow atwould have to prove by results that they know how
the Hoover Institution, wrote about this issue in his book,to teach and motivate children to read, write, and learn.
"Inside American Education."Once this licensing protection racket was broken,
"Despite some attempts to depict such attitudes asparents would have complete control over who
mere snobbery, hard data on education studentteaches their children. Our kids could then learn from
qualifications have consistently shown their mental testthe best teachers out there and get the great
scores to be at or near the bottom among alleducation they deserve.
categories of students. This was as true of studies