The accrediting organizations have not been a target for reform because of resistance by teacher education colleges, the use of these colleges by
universities as cash cows that bring in more students and money when standards are low, etc. etc..
Not exact matches
The deans of education we spoke with indicated that this is because the training of school administrators in certificate and degree programs is typically viewed (especially by the public
universities)
as a «
cash cow,» expected to produce surplus revenue to be used by other, more important programs in the school of education.
Also tucked in the recommendations are such bold ideas
as serious acceptance of alternative pathways and «residency» - style preparation; insistence on real standards for entering prep programs and getting certified; the demand that prep programs respond to K — 12 education's actual supply - demand numbers rather than enrolling
as many people
as possible (thus probably killing the proverbial ed - school «
cash cow» within
universities); and tracking the performance of those emerging from various prep programs and institutions — and actually closing those that don't produce successful professionals.
A major barrier to teacher professionalization is that college and
university leaders too often use education schools
as «
cash cows» to bring revenue into the general budget helping other institutional divisions at the expense of teaching!
And this goes right up to
University administration levels
as all of them see Climate Science
as a
cash cow to bring in grants and don't want to rock the boat.
Law students are
cash cows (and they know it) for
universities that are still committed to constant growth
as an indicator of success.