If you stop and think about it, Teach for America (TFA) and The New Teacher Project (TNTP) are well-functioning, non-profit, national human resource departments for schools. They recruit, screen, and hire candidates, all functions of a traditional HR department. TFA and TNTP do provide a lot more induction and support for their hires, but at the base level their purpose is to find and recommend potential teachers. Of course, school districts have their own human resource departments as well, so it’s worth asking why these programs were needed in the first place.
If you look at the data on the teacher hiring process (some of the best of which has been put together by TNTP itself), what you see is that districts just aren’t very good at it. They’re slow, which causes them to lose out on better candidates. They don’t recruit all that well, which means they have fewer candidates to choose from. And they tend to privilege more experienced teachers throughout the process, which, fair or not, limits their ability to attract young and motivated applicants.
Take, for example, the city of Philadelphia, which employs about 10,000 teachers in its 274 schools. Assuming a 9 percent teacher turnover rate (that’s the national average–it’s much higher in urban and low-income areas), the city needs to hire at least 900 new teachers every year. The graph below from the National Council on Teacher Quality shows how many applicants they’ve gotten over the last six years.
Simple division suggests that Philadelphia public schools are getting a little more than three applicants for every open position.
Compare that to the competition for spots in TFA or TNTP programs. Only one out of nine TFA applicants get hired, and New York City’s Teaching Fellows program, run by the TNTP, had 14,000 applicants apply for 700 spots (or 20 applicants per position).
These numbers matter. At the base level, it means districts have more and better options on who they want in front of its classrooms. Not to mention the symbolic impact for the ones who are selected to know that the position should be coveted, that if you do not care to be there, there are other people who do.
Better Benefits: Reforming Teacher Pensions for a Changing Work Force
The Course of Innovation: Using Technology to Transform Higher Education 
09/03/10 | Kris Amundson gives Virginia policymakers a true/false quiz on the condition of K-12 public education in the state.
09/02/10 | Elena Silva compares two proposals for the next generation of computer-based assessments funded by the U.S. Department of Education.
09/01/10 | Forrest Hinton explains why consumer choice and market forces are currently weak influences on higher education quality. 
09/01/10 | Chad Aldeman's and Kevin Carey's thoughts on value-added teacher evaluations are featured in The Atlantic
Both TFA and Teaching Fellows have rigorous applicant training programs . I know many people that have attempted to enter the program but did not make it through the initial stages of acceptance. It did not mean that they could not be valuable in the education of our youth, it only means that they met the requirements for what both the programs were looking for.
I know fellow teachers that have gone through each of these programs and have done an amazing job on their first year of teaching. Many of these new teachers outshined veteran teachers on their first year and especially for most on their second or third year.
Yes there are TFA and Teaching Fellows teachers that leave the program for any number of reasons. They do not resign on the notion that they cannot handle teaching. Many times they leave because of district support. It is easy to argue that the district shouldn’t have to offer support if the teacher is well trained, but the fact remains that these teachers teach at high-need/low-income communities. Many times they do leave for their own personal reasons. Be it veteran or new teacher, it is necessary to engage these areas with even more rigor than the state or federal gov deem necessary.
The programs are amazing and by and large effective. The ultimate problem stems from whether or not adequate funding and support is provided to districts so as to provide the quality education our students deserve. What is necessary from the rest of our population is to judge the merits of those that have succeeded as well as those that have attempted to teach and improve the program that has made more of an impact on student lives than the current educational training systems have done. RESEARCH…LEARN…DISCUSS.
Maybe Philadelphia must have a higher standard in hiring teachers for a better quality education.
Also, TFA applicants are not required to be certified in their subject area, while normal applicants are. Therefore, the 3 to 1 applicant to job ratio also reflects the fact that far fewer people are going through traditional teacher certification programs, and are thus not prepared with curriculum planning courses or student teaching when entering their job. Nice, TFA.
Why is Philadelphia lacking so much more as far as applicants go?
I disagree with these programs, in a small percentage of cases they work. Look at the Teaching Fellows program that NYC has, most of the participants have jobs that they cannot succeed in, and the city hires them to make them teachers. Most of whom I have met (in class) have English as their second language and are not shining examples to put in front of a class. I may sound bitter, and I am, I was not selected for the program. I had to pay for the Master's out of my own pocket. Most of the Fellows get their Master's paid for and flunk out of the program. What a waste of money!!
say what you want most of the TFAs i have known had 1 foot out the door the first day on the job.