Robert C. Pianta vastly oversimplified the narrative about accountability among those who prepare educators [“A new low in the teacher wars,” op-ed, Feb. 21].

Educator preparation programs should indeed be accountable, and the profession has been busy creating data tools and processes for accountability. States such as Louisiana, California and Georgia are working to determine the best ways to use data collected through existing assessments and surveys to document program impact. These systems rely on access to K-12 student achievement data as one indicator.

We support efforts such as the Teacher Quality Partnership grants that create tighter collaboration between K-12 and higher education partners, deeper clinical experiences using the residency model, improved response to workforce needs, induction support for at least two years after program completion and a 100 percent financial match.

Teachers and teacher educators want to be part of defining accountability so that their best thinking will serve the public’s interest. Stronger accreditation standards and performance assessments have been designed to answer the essential question of whether new teachers are ready for the job. There’s no more direct measure than one that shows the capacity of candidates to do the work of teaching. 

Our work to create accountability metrics continues, as we engage with policymakers to assure that those completing educator preparation are ready for the challenges on Day One.

Sharon P. Robinson, Washington

The writer is president and chief executive of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.