What is the Best Way to Evaluate Teachers?

[Fnord]

I used to think that if the majority of students in a classroom failed some standardized examination, that the teacher should somehow be held accountable. Now, after a series of well-publicized strikes (as reported in the CNN article, "Why America's Teachers are Enraged (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html?hpt=T2)"), I am no longer certain that teachers are the sole cause of student failure.

Yes, it really does take some of us a little longer to see the obvious, but that is not the point I am trying to make, so please don't bag on me for not seeing it sooner. This quote from the article is what gave me that oh-so necessary "DOING!" moment:

"There are many reasons why students do well or poorly on tests, and teachers felt they were being unfairly blamed when students got low scores, while the crucial role of families and the students themselves was overlooked."

So let's say that more than half of a fifth-grade class has failed some standardized exam, and their teacher, Mrs. Strawman, is facing removal from her position, in spite of numerous reports of how compassionate, dedicated, motivated, and knowledgeable she is.

What factors, aside from Mrs. Strawman's ability and willingness to teach, could be measured, how can those measurements be made, how should the measurements be reported, and what should be done about the findings?

I would really hate to see yet another another generation of teachers get the shaft while the next go-around of the latest educational theories and their applications fail, especially when the future lives of the students (and their teachers) are at stake.

[Startz]

There is no single best way to evaluate teachers; multiple measurements should be used. However, simply looking at pass rates on standardized tests is almost certainly a very bad way to do the evaluation. At a very minimum, one wants to look at what are called "value-added measures." These measure student growth, which gives an adjustment for where the students started off the year.

[Beerina]

IIRC, home emphasis on education and homework outweighs other factors by orders of magnitude. Once I learned that (and that Asian countries with class size of 40 or more lay waste to the US in quality of student education) I stopped being so concerned about

Oh jeeze, it's the part where Ani is riding the giant tick and Padme is laughing. Oh noe, he fell off and is hurt!

Oh, whew! He's just faking to make her laugh. This relieves me.


Anyway, I stopped caring so much about classroom issues per se. But that works in both directions -- the importance of small classes also evaporates. It's not just about teacher evaluations, or books, money, or even public vs. private, compared to home emphasis.

[bikerdruid]

IIRC, home emphasis on education and homework outweighs other factors by orders of magnitude. Once I learned that (and that Asian countries with class size of 40 or more lay waste to the US in quality of student education) I stopped being so concerned about

Oh jeeze, it's the part where Ani is riding the giant tick and Padme is laughing. Oh noe, he fell off and is hurt!

Oh, whew! He's just faking to make her laugh. This relieves me.


Anyway, I stopped caring so much about class size. But that works in both directions -- the importance of small classes also evaporates. It's not just about teacher evaluations, or books, or much of anything compared to home emphasis.

it's not often that we agree on issues, but this is one.
i was a teacher for over 25 years.

the value that is placed on education in the home is a extremely important factor in a student's success.
i live in northern alberta, where the oil patch pays big wages. a 17 or 18 year old kid can make 2-5 thousand a month in the patch. in families that are all patch workers, fewer kids graduate. 4-5 thousand a month working on the rigs trumps high school.

my students tended to work at provincial averages. i had fewer failures than some teachers, but that came at the cost of fewer at excellence, since i tended to work more with the kids that had the greatest struggle.

there is no doubt that the home environment is the strongest factor affecting student achievement.

[Fnord]

Lemme re-ask the question, as stated:

... What factors, aside from Mrs. Strawman's ability and willingness to teach, could be measured, how can those measurements be made, how should the measurements be reported, and what should be done about the findings?

How can parent participation be measured?

Can (should) parents be held legally accountable for the failure of their children?

Could the same standards be applied to communities and local governments?

I met with some teachers this morning (six, at church), and they seemed to agree that one of their worst problems occur when parents abdicate all responsibility for their children's education.

So how can the parents be evaluated? Should they be evaluated?

[geni]

Statisticaly the general approach is so called value added.

We can tell how a pupil from a certian background and testing at a certian level will do on average.

So suppose at the start of the year you have a bunch of students from sink estate that have previously been failing badly. Statisticaly we would expect a group of 30 to end the year with 2 students getting a C 5 at D and the rest failing spectacularly.

If a teacher gets them up to 4 Cs and 6 Ds they are sucessful. If they only get 3 Ds they are not.

Equaly if you have a bunch of students from the leafy suburbs out of 30 we might expect 25 As and 5 Bs and we can apply the same kind of test.


Run this over a number of years and you can spot the weaker teachers.

This can admitely have some issues in extreme cases. If you are expected to get 30 straight As it's a bit hard to add value. Equaly it's possible to have classes where added value would probably be "didn't add to their criminal record".

[Fnord]

... We can tell how a pupil from a certian background and testing at a certian level will do on average...

Doesn't that risk an outcry of "Racial Profiling"?

[rjh01]

Statisticaly the general approach is so called value added.

We can tell how a pupil from a certian background and testing at a certian level will do on average.

So suppose at the start of the year you have a bunch of students from sink estate that have previously been failing badly. Statisticaly we would expect a group of 30 to end the year with 2 students getting a C 5 at D and the rest failing spectacularly.
<snip>

One issue with value added. Suppose in the previous year the teacher was first class. Everyone got one grade better than what was expected. For those students this year, what would be expected with a standard teacher?
a. Carry on with the good grade.
b. Go back to standard. Then what was the point of the previous good year.
c. Somewhere between a and b.

[Startz]

You can get surprisingly far by just looking at the difference between a September test and a June test, as for the most part background variables don't change. In this way, if a teacher is handed a group of 5th grade students who start at the fourth grade level and the teacher brings them up to half way through grade 5 achievement, it's recognized that the students advanced one-and-a-half years. And that's a good job even though they still haven't entirely caught up with grade level.

[geni]

Doesn't that risk an outcry of "Racial Profiling"?

I wasn't aware that postcodes had a race.

[geni]

One issue with value added. Suppose in the previous year the teacher was first class. Everyone got one grade better than what was expected. For those students this year, what would be expected with a standard teacher?
a. Carry on with the good grade.
b. Go back to standard. Then what was the point of the previous good year.
c. Somewhere between a and b.

Probably C but one of the reasons you look at results over several years is to ajust for such things.

[Dancing David]

I used to think that if the majority of students in a classroom failed some standardized examination, that the teacher should somehow be held accountable. Now, after a series of well-publicized strikes (as reported in the CNN article, "Why America's Teachers are Enraged (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html?hpt=T2)"), I am no longer certain that teachers are the sole cause of student failure.

Yes, it really does take some of us a little longer to see the obvious, but that is not the point I am trying to make, so please don't bag on me for not seeing it sooner. This quote from the article is what gave me that oh-so necessary "DOING!" moment:



So let's say that more than half of a fifth-grade class has failed some standardized exam, and their teacher, Mrs. Strawman, is facing removal from her position, in spite of numerous reports of how compassionate, dedicated, motivated, and knowledgeable she is.

What factors, aside from Mrs. Strawman's ability and willingness to teach, could be measured, how can those measurements be made, how should the measurements be reported, and what should be done about the findings?

I would really hate to see yet another another generation of teachers get the shaft while the next go-around of the latest educational theories and their applications fail, especially when the future lives of the students (and their teachers) are at stake.

There are is an issue in standardized testing itself:

-aggregate scores, which is what NCLB uses, they do not track student progress individually, they lump them together and set an arbitrary standard. So every student could show marked gains in all areas but the aggregate would not reflect that.

Off the top of my head, here are the issues that impact students:

-low SES and the stress of that life, especially when your parents works and has no car
-family culture, especially older sibs and the like
-neighborhood culture
-family chaos, domestic violence, substance abuse and unstable housing
-violence in the neighborhood and family
-frequent moves as a result of other factors
-teen parents (twenty when your baby is in kindergarten)
-absent parents

and my favorite

There are no provisions made for the slow learners, these are the students who are one standard deviation below the mean to two standard deviations below the mean.

So they have an IQ of 85-70 and they get no extra services, they are not learning disabled because their test scores (in calls and home work) reflect their IQ, they are not cognitively impaired (ie retarded) because their IQ is above 70.

So five teen percent of the population will start behind and loose grounds as they age, they will not keep up with their peers, no matter what. But no extra services for them,

[Scott Sommers]

The problem of evaluating teachers is very technically complex. There is a vast technical literature on this. The use of standardized tests is the most common way to do this right now. There are other methods available, but none appear as objective and are as well understood by statisticians as are the methods that use standardized tests. Other methods are under development and will likely emerge as useful alternatives.

Value-Added Methods (VAM) are one of the ways in which standardized tests can be used. This method is widely used in the USA. The idea behind a VAM-based evaluation is that student's past performance can be used to predict future performance and then compared with their actual performance. In actual practice, it is very hard to predict individual trajectory of scores and most experts will tell you that only school performance can be interpreted meaningfully. This has not stopped policy-makers from using individual VAM scores for their own purposes.

There is no real consensus about how to conduct VAM. Different states do it differently. In Tennessee, the argument has been not to include background social variables in the equation used to predict future performance. Since student's current performance has already been caused by these variables, to enter them in the equation would be to count their effect twice. I believe this has been adopted because there is so much missing data from students who transfer in and out of schools, even from different states, that some way of making predictions for these students had to be devised.

[Fnord]

I wasn't aware that postcodes had a race.
Ahh ... good point.

Let me elaborate.

If the children inside the 90210 zip code do exceptionally well on standardized tests, and the children inside the 39269 zip code do exceptionally bad on those exact same standardized tests, then could a claim of racial bias be made?

[Scott Sommers]

Many variables are used as indicators of race. Postal code is used. Another widely used variable is proportion of students in a free lunch program. The prediction of VAM scores is not standardized and there are many different formulas used.

[Dancing David]

Many variables are used as indicators of race. Postal code is used. Another widely used variable is proportion of students in a free lunch program. The prediction of VAM scores is not standardized and there are many different formulas used.

Free reduced lunch is a measure of low SES, not always race.

[Teemu]

Best way to evaluate the teachers is to do it within the school taking in to account the local factors, and the best way to encourage this internal evaluation is school choice.

[NewtonTrino]

It doesn't matter how they are evaluated until the teacher unions are broken so something can actually be done with these evaluations.

[Dancing David]

It doesn't matter how they are evaluated until the teacher unions are broken so something can actually be done with these evaluations.

People can be fired under most contracts, what makes you think they can't?

In fact competency is a core of moste valuations, maybe you should actually go to a school and look inside.

[bigred]

there is no doubt that the home environment is the strongest factor affecting student achievement.
On an order of magnitude. That should be a water-is-wet statement. Yet teachers have been taking a pounding and had their authority shredded in oh the last few decades or so. The USA has done an absolutely horrible job of supporting public schools and surprise, they are in big trouble.


If the children inside the 90210 zip code do exceptionally well on standardized tests, and the children inside the 39269 zip code do exceptionally bad on those exact same standardized tests, then could a claim of racial bias be made? Only by race card junkies or similarly assorted morons, who I'm sure will do so no matter what anyway. :rolleyes:Alleged "racial bias" in fact was no small part of why we came up with standardized tests in the first place.

[NewtonTrino]

People can be fired under most contracts, what makes you think they can't?

In fact competency is a core of moste valuations, maybe you should actually go to a school and look inside.

In my state when doing layoffs they go with seniority, not competency.

Do you have a state that's different? Sure if someone is totally imcompetent they can (maybe) get them fired. But what about when you need to make cuts? E.g. like now.

[theprestige]

IIRC, home emphasis on education and homework outweighs other factors by orders of magnitude. Once I learned that (and that Asian countries with class size of 40 or more lay waste to the US in quality of student education) I stopped being so concerned about

Oh jeeze, it's the part where Ani is riding the giant tick and Padme is laughing. Oh noe, he fell off and is hurt!

Oh, whew! He's just faking to make her laugh. This relieves me.


Anyway, I stopped caring so much about classroom issues per se. But that works in both directions -- the importance of small classes also evaporates. It's not just about teacher evaluations, or books, money, or even public vs. private, compared to home emphasis.

it's not often that we agree on issues, but this is one.
i was a teacher for over 25 years.

the value that is placed on education in the home is a extremely important factor in a student's success.
i live in northern alberta, where the oil patch pays big wages. a 17 or 18 year old kid can make 2-5 thousand a month in the patch. in families that are all patch workers, fewer kids graduate. 4-5 thousand a month working on the rigs trumps high school.

my students tended to work at provincial averages. i had fewer failures than some teachers, but that came at the cost of fewer at excellence, since i tended to work more with the kids that had the greatest struggle.

there is no doubt that the home environment is the strongest factor affecting student achievement.

Lemme re-ask the question, as stated:



How can parent participation be measured?

Can (should) parents be held legally accountable for the failure of their children?

Could the same standards be applied to communities and local governments?

I met with some teachers this morning (six, at church), and they seemed to agree that one of their worst problems occur when parents abdicate all responsibility for their children's education.

So how can the parents be evaluated? Should they be evaluated?

All this discussion about the importance of parent engagement brings to my mind the following points, in a thinking-out-loud kind of way:
If it's the parents that make the biggest difference, and by so much, why are we so hot to spend all this money on the teachers?
Wouldn't we be way better off slashing school budgets to the bone, returning most of it to the taxpayers, and spending the remainder on programs to encourage parent participation in educating their children?
I mean, wouldn't a dollar spent on parent engagement be worth "orders of magnitude" more than a dollar spent on teacher salaries?
And isn't it possible that parent apathy stems in part from the several decades of wrongheaded hyping of the school and the teachers as the really important part of education?
And if teachers really aren't as important to education as they're hyped up to be, how much are they really worth, anyway?
Not only that, but if education is primarily about the parents, then it seems to me our education system is working just fine, and most kids are getting exactly as much education as their parents want them to get.
Well, except for those parents who have been misled into thinking that it's the teachers and schools that will be doing most of the work.
And those parents who lack the resources necessary to engage with their children's education as much as they'd like.
You know who should probably get all the resources teachers' unions are demanding these days? Those parents.

[Startz]

There is a huge amount of statistical evidence that teachers are incredibly important to student outcomes. One number often cited is that the difference between a really top teacher and a poor one is 1.5 years of student academic achievement over the course of one year.

Parents are very important. That doesn't mean teachers are not very important. For those interested, I wrote about the logical fallacy involved at http://profitofeducation.org/?p=708

[theprestige]

There is a huge amount of statistical evidence that teachers are incredibly important to student outcomes. One number often cited is that the difference between a really top teacher and a poor one is 1.5 years of student academic achievement over the course of one year.

Parents are very important. That doesn't mean teachers are not very important. For those interested, I wrote about the logical fallacy involved at http://profitofeducation.org/?p=708

Oh, I agree that teachers are important. But if parents are "orders of magnitude" more important, and we keep throwing money at teachers, and education outcomes keep not improving the way we would like, don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we're throwing money in the wrong direction? Don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we've been throwing money in the wrong direction for some time, and that the solution isn't to throw more money at teachers, but rather less (and maybe throw more money at parents instead)?

[Startz]

Oh, I agree that teachers are important. But if parents are "orders of magnitude" more important, and we keep throwing money at teachers, and education outcomes keep not improving the way we would like, don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we're throwing money in the wrong direction? Don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we've been throwing money in the wrong direction for some time, and that the solution isn't to throw more money at teachers, but rather less (and maybe throw more money at parents instead)?

We don't keep throwing money at teachers. Teacher salaries, compared to other college-educated workers, have fallen over the last several decades. We have greatly increased spending on K-12 schools, but it hasn't gone into higher teacher salaries.

[Malerin]

There are is an issue in standardized testing itself:

-aggregate scores, which is what NCLB uses, they do not track student progress individually, they lump them together and set an arbitrary standard. So every student could show marked gains in all areas but the aggregate would not reflect that.

Off the top of my head, here are the issues that impact students:

-low SES and the stress of that life, especially when your parents works and has no car
-family culture, especially older sibs and the like
-neighborhood culture
-family chaos, domestic violence, substance abuse and unstable housing
-violence in the neighborhood and family
-frequent moves as a result of other factors
-teen parents (twenty when your baby is in kindergarten)
-absent parents

and my favorite

There are no provisions made for the slow learners, these are the students who are one standard deviation below the mean to two standard deviations below the mean.

So they have an IQ of 85-70 and they get no extra services, they are not learning disabled because their test scores (in calls and home work) reflect their IQ, they are not cognitively impaired (ie retarded) because their IQ is above 70.

So five teen percent of the population will start behind and loose grounds as they age, they will not keep up with their peers, no matter what. But no extra services for them,

(ie retarded)

[Malerin]

People can be fired under most contracts, what makes you think they can't?

In fact competency is a core of moste valuations, maybe you should actually go to a school and look inside.

I've been with the local teacher's union for 8 years now (site rep, VP, and now president). I'm never seen a teacher let go for incompetence. It doesn't happen.

[Dr. Keith]

I've been with the local teacher's union for 8 years now (site rep, VP, and now president). I'm never seen a teacher let go for incompetence. It doesn't happen.

The unions must vary in strength. I've seen teachers fired for incompetence from my kids school as well as schools my wife worked at. Well, non-renewed is the term they use.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

As with many things, there is no set criteria but you know it when you see it.

There are some crappy teachers out there, yes. Uneducated, unprepared, untrained. There are some who just plain wrong for the job and should be off working in a cubicle somewhere.

However, it is the students and the parents who should be blamed for the sad state of affairs. In my personal experience, even the best teacher can't help someone from a bad environment who does not want to help him or herself.

[theprestige]

We don't keep throwing money at teachers. Teacher salaries, compared to other college-educated workers, have fallen over the last several decades. We have greatly increased spending on K-12 schools, but it hasn't gone into higher teacher salaries.

Thanks for the information. My point isn't so much against spending money on teachers, so much as it is for spending money on whatever it is that really matters right now.

All the greatly increased spending on K-12 schools, would teachers agree that some or all of that increase would have been better spent on parent engagement?

[bigred]

I've been with the local teacher's union for 8 years now (site rep, VP, and now president). I'm never seen a teacher let go for incompetence. It doesn't happen.
Good ol unions. :vomit: My understand is that it is rare, at least, although mileages may vary.


All the greatly increased spending on K-12 schools, would teachers agree that some or all of that increase would have been better spent on parent engagement?I really really doubt it and understandably so. I think money spent on parents would mostly be a hideous waste. Ahole parents are ahole parents and throwing some "parent participation encouragement program" or the like won't change anything, least of all them, in most cases.

Generally though, I really don't think it's about money.

[fuelair]

Oh, I agree that teachers are important. But if parents are "orders of magnitude" more important, and we keep throwing money at teachers, and education outcomes keep not improving the way we would like, don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we're throwing money in the wrong direction? Don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we've been throwing money in the wrong direction for some time, and that the solution isn't to throw more money at teachers, but rather less (and maybe throw more money at parents instead)?

Where have we been throwing money at teachers??? Really, I want to move there!!!

[Dancing David]

I've been with the local teacher's union for 8 years now (site rep, VP, and now president). I'm never seen a teacher let go for incompetence. It doesn't happen.

That is the fault of the adminsitration is it not? The power exists but it not used? So fire the principal first, then the assistant superindendant and the superindendant.

I have seen staff fired for incompetance.

[Dancing David]

(ie retarded)

What was the point?

Does your school district provide extra services to the slow learners, do you even know?

[Dancing David]

There is a huge amount of statistical evidence that teachers are incredibly important to student outcomes. One number often cited is that the difference between a really top teacher and a poor one is 1.5 years of student academic achievement over the course of one year.



And how did they control for student placement in class rooms? Tt is not random. Principals usually assign them.

[Dancing David]

In my state when doing layoffs they go with seniority, not competency.

And that is different from any other bussiness , how?

Most bussinesses are even worse, cronism and capricious favoritism exists in teh private scetor as well.

In my district there are two pools, tenure and non-tenure. There is no seniority within the pool, tenured teachers do not have seniority. They can be RIFed after all the non-tenure teachers are RIFed.


Do you have a state that's different? Sure if someone is totally imcompetent they can (maybe) get them fired. But what about when you need to make cuts? E.g. like now.

Most contract have guidelines for how to fire people, so who is at fault?

the people who do not exercise that option?

Core competancy is part of evaluations, you can could be fired for being incompetant.

And how is that different from the common practices in private bussiness, there is usually the same practice?

In fact bussiness is not better at keeping competant employess than schools.

The issue is competancy, and the problem with standard tests is that they do not test for the single largest skill a teacher MUST have, class room management.


[aside]
Now I do have problems with the way staff invoke in the teachers union invoke the union contract when it does not apply. But that is also a problem that the admins need to address, not in the contract, not a union issue.

My union non-certified support staff: secrataries, teacher's aides, techs, operations, maintainenece, everyone who is not 'certified staff', we get fired all the time. But then we DO have seniority.

So if my placement goes away (which it most likely is), I go to the top of the list. I can be passed over for someone with 'nessecary skills' however.

[Startz]

And how did they control for student placement in class rooms? Tt is not random. Principals usually assign them.

There are a whole series of studies along these lines. In most, they use value added measures. This controls for student ability, although not perfectly. In some studies students are in fact assigned randomly as part of the experiment.

[bigred]

There is a huge amount of statistical evidence that teachers are incredibly important to student outcomesThe fact that statistical evidence is even needed for such an obvious truth itself speaks volumes about the state of education. Good grief.

[truethat]

The problem with teacher evaluations is that schools teach to test in order to get additional funding. (at least here in NYC) and that schools are reluctant to fail students who deserve to be failed because it reflects poorly on the school.

Student evaluations that are matched with their results would be a good way to do it in my opinion.

Take the top ten and bottom ten percent of the class and have them evaluate the effectiveness of a teacher. Then examine the opinions as juxtaposed with performance. That would be one way to get a better picture.

[Dancing David]

There are a whole series of studies along these lines. In most, they use value added measures. This controls for student ability, although not perfectly. In some studies students are in fact assigned randomly as part of the experiment.

The problem that I see is that besides the fact that good principles spread around the disruptive students (high flyers), other principles punish staff with disruptive students or dump them on new staff.

So you need a tighter control than value added, then there is also the placement of slow students.

That is a serious artifact.

[fuelair]

What was the point?

Does your school district provide extra services to the slow learners, do you even know?

It is generally required by the ADA so all school districts in the US certainly should be!!:)

[fuelair]

The problem with teacher evaluations is that schools teach to test in order to get additional funding. (at least here in NYC) and that schools are reluctant to fail students who deserve to be failed because it reflects poorly on the school.

Student evaluations that are matched with their results would be a good way to do it in my opinion.

Take the top ten and bottom ten percent of the class and have them evaluate the effectiveness of a teacher. Then examine the opinions as juxtaposed with performance. That would be one way to get a better picture.

Since you bring up t to t, I have heard that New York is going to drop the Regent's. Do you know if that is true and what they plan to replace it with. Curious because Florida is planning to start the functional equivalent of the Regent's over the next few years.

[Fnord]

I could never be a teacher.

I believe in self-motivation.
I believe in homework.
I believe in classroom discipline.
I believe in administrative support.
I believe in parental involvement.
I believe in promotion by merit.
I believe in self-representation.
I believe in measurable results.
I believe in earning privileges.

I could never be a teacher.

[Dancing David]

It is generally required by the ADA so all school districts in the US certainly should be!!:)

Nope, they do not meet the qualifications, they are slow not disabled, that is the point I am trying to make.

You have to have an IQ of ~70 or less to qualify as having a cognitive diability. It the mast it was 75 but it has moved down 5 pts. (Cut taxes, cut taxes, buy more guns, buy more guns.)

You have to have test and class room preformance that does not match your IQ to have a learning disability.

Slow learners fall in a gap, they do not receive special services.

they do not qualify fro either defintion for special services.

[Dancing David]

I could never be a teacher.

I believe in self-motivation.
I believe in homework.
I believe in classroom discipline.
I believe in administrative support.
I believe in parental involvement.
I believe in promotion by merit.
I believe in self-representation.
I believe in measurable results.
I believe in earning privileges.

I could never be a teacher.



What makes you think teachers would not agree with you?

They work in a system, most teachers i work with have large amounts of 'table', 'desk' and 'centers' work. All use self motivation.

Most send work home that is not compleated as homework.

Most use class room management, otherwise they can't teach. (I means seriously kindergarteners working at their tasks while the teacher runs a reading group, that sounds like management to me)

Depends on what you mean by adminsitrative support. You can't refer students for class room management issues.

Promotion by merit, that is a school board issue, sorry. Local politics are always strange.

Grades are measure based, they are not drawn from a hat.

Earning privileges, um I wonder how many children I see loose privileges everyday? (Six in the lab yesterday, no computer as a consequence of not controlling themselves, first graders, teacher's system. Sitting out recess is another, we have vast rewards system for bus behavior and cafeteria behaviors as well, or hall way behavior)

The real issue is that 5% of the children generate 80% of the issues.

Now I work in a rather progressive and competant school district.

[Dr. Keith]

Nope, they do not meet teh qualifications, they are slow not disabled, that is the point I am trying to make.

You have to have an IQ of ~70 or less to qualify as having a cognitive diability.

You have to have test and class room preformance that does not match your IQ to have a learning disability.

Slow learners fall in a gap, they do not receive special services.

they do not qualify fro either defintion for special services.

That is not my experience. One of the benefits of the testing our kids suffer through is that slow leathers are identified and given extra help. Our schools are judged on overall grades as well as sub pops. Bringing up the slow leathers is an easy way to improve both.

[Fnord]

I could never be a teacher.

I believe in self-motivation.
I believe in homework.
I believe in classroom discipline.
I believe in administrative support.
I believe in parental involvement.
I believe in promotion by merit.
I believe in self-representation.
I believe in measurable results.
I believe in earning privileges.

I could never be a teacher.

What makes you think teachers would not agree with you?
I do not think that.

It's just that I believe in these ideals to such a great degree that my first contract would never be renewed.

This is based on my experiences as a maths tutor in the military. There, my classes had three students at the most, and the failure rate was still about half. I had to deal with students who showed up late (if they showed up at all), never did homework, cracked jokes, and either expected to be spoon-fed the answers or have their evals pencil-whipped into a passing grade. I also had to deal with higher-ups who either wanted 100% success "no matter what it takes" ( ;) ;) ), or who didn't care if anyone showed up for remedial tutoring. No one seemed to care at all if those remedials actually learned anything, as long I signed off on their remediation. This frustrating experience is one of the many reasons why I did not re-up.

I could never be a teacher. Their problems are at least ten-fold of what I went through, and I did it for only one year.

[Dancing David]

That is not my experience. One of the benefits of the testing our kids suffer through is that slow leathers are identified and given extra help. Our schools are judged on overall grades as well as sub pops. Bringing up the slow leathers is an easy way to improve both.

Must be nice, but then Illinois is now like 48 in education funding. :(

[Dancing David]

I do not think that.

It's just that I believe in these ideals to such a great degree that my first contract would never be renewed.

This is based on my experiences as a maths tutor in the military. There, my classes had three students at the most, and the failure rate was still about half. I had to deal with students who showed up late (if they showed up at all), never did homework, cracked jokes, and either expected to be spoon-fed the answers or have their evals pencil-whipped into a passing grade. I also had to deal with higher-ups who either wanted 100% success "no matter what it takes" ( ;) ;) ), or who didn't care if anyone showed up for remedial tutoring. No one seemed to care at all if those remedials actually learned anything, as long I signed off on their remediation. This frustrating experience is one of the many reasons why I did not re-up.

I could never be a teacher. Their problems are at least ten-fold of what I went through, and I did it for only one year.

Yuck, how horrible, one of the redeeming things of working with K-12 students is that most of them want to learn (not all of them). So once you establish the relationship and develop the patience it gets easier.

My dad when he was a prof at the U of I used to fail athletes despite all the ;) ;) ;)

[Alt+F4]

You can get surprisingly far by just looking at the difference between a September test and a June test....

You're assuming that all those students who took the September test will still be with the same teacher in June. Highly unlikely in large, urban school districts where transience, long-term absenteeism and multiple schedule changes are common.

Even if you could track the same students from September to June, "value added" is still a poor way to evaluate teachers. If teacher A takes a special education or a English language learner from a 30 average in September to a 50 aveage in June, that's still considered a failure. All Obama, Duncan (and now Cathy Black) want are passing test scores, nothing else matter. They care very little if the kids are learning anything, all they care about is the stats.

The focus on education in the United States should be more on parent evaluation -- but then no one gets elected with a speach on parental apathy.

[Alt+F4]

It doesn't matter how they are evaluated until the teacher unions are broken so something can actually be done with these evaluations.

Such as?

[Alt+F4]

Oh, I agree that teachers are important. But if parents are "orders of magnitude" more important, and we keep throwing money at teachers, and education outcomes keep not improving the way we would like, don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we're throwing money in the wrong direction? Don't we at some point have to consider the possibility that we've been throwing money in the wrong direction for some time, and that the solution isn't to throw more money at teachers, but rather less (and maybe throw more money at parents instead)?

Yeah, but how does throwing money at the parents make them better parents? How do you get a parent to sit down with their kids for an hour and help them with their homework? Do we pay parents $20 to attend a parent/teacher meeting?

[Alt+F4]

Since you bring up t to t, I have heard that New York is going to drop the Regent's. Do you know if that is true and what they plan to replace it with. Curious because Florida is planning to start the functional equivalent of the Regent's over the next few years.

It's my understanding that it's only the January Regents that the state is thinking of dropping, for budgetary reasons. Students can still take the exams in June and August.

For those that think that standardized testing in the best way to evalutate teachers, what do we do with the approximate 70% of high school teachers who's courses don't end in a standardized test?

[blutoski]

Yeah, there's a lot of myths about education. Unionization doesn't seem to be an important factor. (80% of magnet schools are non-unionized and on average they underperform unionized public schools on standardized testing - there are a mix of reasons for this, but that's the point)

I read a study that indicated if districts were to replace underperforming teachers with outsiders (as opposed to hiring an underperforming teacher laid off from another district) that in order to achieve 90% grade targets in the NCLB, the USA would have to gradute something like 2 million teachers in the next 5 years to go through the test/terminate process, OR not replace them, and have the remaining top-performing teachers handle classes of approximately 120 students each. That's not going to happen, so 'firing the bad teachers' is not mechanically going to solve the problem of poor teachers in the system.



The one mechanism for teacher evalutation that hasn't been mentioned is peer evaluation. There are some districts that identify their bottom-performing teachers through anonymous peer surveys. The premise is that a crappy grade 5 math teacher makes extra work for the grade 6 math teachers, so they are motivated to resolve the problem, even if it means replacing the occasional teacher.

[Saggy]

Teachers should be evaluated the way they were 20 years ago, the way most employees are evaluated, by their superiors, in this case the school principal, using all the information at his/her command.

We have completely lost faith in teachers, principals, and the entire educational system, because the system is being forced to attempt to educate students that are for all practical purposes un-educatable and discipline problems to boot.

The scapegoat is the teacher. Teacher evaluations are not the problem.

I'll go further. I have a kid in Catholic school even though I'm not Catholic. The teachers are reasonably intelligent, well motivated, and well meaning. The curriculum is so standardized that everything is taught straight out of books, page by page. We're talking grade school here. Given good students and a benign environment there is no way they could botch the job, and they don't. The school is excellent.

[Dancing David]

Very few students are "un-educatable" and there is a range of discipline problems. You works with what ya gets.

The issue is that the students are who they are, in all their wonder and problems. But a school does not have the resources to address the issues of poverty and violence, chaotic families, absent parents and the myriad of issues.

Yet it works, many students who are hard to reach are reached and they learn.

The issues we see in my school district are amazing, especially since we have good job opportunities in my area, we get many many many people from all sorts of places.

What amazes me is the crap people who have never worked in a school say, about schools.

For example:

"They need to run on a business model"

My school district has something like 16 schools in it, with 22 servers and about 2,000 computers, but only 11 people to manage the whole thing, one of whom is the director and another who is the assistant director and go to lots and lots of meetings, one server tech, two IT administrative staff, one web and sharepoint guy and six techs. Apparently this is sort of low for a corporate structure our size.

Or my two grade schools, they both are 4-strand schools so read about 20 regular class room with one art and music teacher, 1.5 PE, two SPED, one speech pathologist, etc... Each build has around 500 students.

What do we have for administration? One principal, one assistant principal and two very busy office staff. I have worked in many many retail settings, where you have much higher administration to staff ratios for having 30 staff members and 500 customers.

[Saggy]

The issue is that the students are who they are, in all their wonder and problems. But a school does not have the resources to address the issues of poverty and violence, chaotic families, absent parents and the myriad of issues..

Well, just to stay on topic, how should teachers be evaluated?

And straying off topic, Just what resources do you need to address the issues of poverty and violence, chaotic families, absent parents and the myriad of issues ? And I'll note, these issues don't just apply to individuals, with some schools having warring factions.

Here's my answer - a magic wand. No amount of money will do it.

What's your answer?

And, what's the state's answer? The answer is to privatize education, starting with charter schools. Part of their program is to trash public education, and one of the ways they do it is by constantly attacking the teachers.

In NYC they've announced big teacher lay-offs for next year. Half the legislature has passed a law restructuring hiring practices to suit the school critics, but it probably will die. The new gov. is cooking up another scheme to go after the teachers.

But, get this, the school board has, as I understand it, just agreed to put teacher evaluations on the WEB ! LOL. This way every parent can get in on the criticism of the teachers, it can be a community activity.

[Dancing David]

Lots to respond to there Saggy, more later. But community criticism, uh huh, okay, sure. I can see the real problems with that, like the BD kids who don't have a problem we are all just 'racists'.

Or the parents who get tresspass bars against them.

More money can help, especially to create safe places for children.

[tyr_13]

Has the swimsuit portion been mentioned yet?

[Dancing David]

Has the swimsuit portion been mentioned yet?

The talent show is kind of dull.

[KingofMadCows]

One of the biggest problems with the education system is that the distribution in student ability is too wide. It's just assumed that a kid's skills are uniform across all subjects but there are a lot of cases where a kid has maybe 3rd grade reading skills but their math skill is only between 1st or 2nd grade. Then they get put in the second grade where their reading skill is too advanced but their math skill is behind. As a result of things like that, you get this big distribution with the teacher teaching towards the middle and you have the more advanced kids getting bored and the struggling kids getting left behind.

There's also the problem that teachers aren't really taught effective teaching techniques. They don't reinforce good behavior nearly enough. If you want a kid to behave, you can't just tell them to behave and then ignore them when they do it. You have to periodically reinforce them for behaving in the right way if you want to increase the frequency of that behavior. The way that testing is conducted is also flawed. If you want the best results, you have to provide immediate feedback. You can't give kids a test one day and go over the next on the next day. When giving a test, going over the answers immediately after the test is done greatly increases the chance of a person's ability to learn which mistakes they made and what the correct answers are. Not only that, but it also teaches the kid to review the subject after testing to consolidate learning, a skill that will become more and more useful in later school years.

[bigred]

What amazes me is the crap people who have never worked in a school say, about schools.

For example:

"They need to run on a business model"

Anyone who even uses that trendy asinine phrase should be shot, but that aside.......anyone who tries to apply such trite little Corporate 101 gibberish to a school, which is a decidedly different animal, is basically screaming I AM A MORON.

[Last of the Fraggles]

Anyone who even uses that trendy asinine phrase should be shot, but that aside.......anyone who tries to apply such trite little Corporate 101 gibberish to a school, which is a decidedly different animal, is basically screaming I AM A MORON.

In what way is a school a decidely different animal to a business? They may have different objectives but anyone claiming that you can't apply business principles to something like a school would be more likely to trigger my I AM A MORON alert than someone who does.

[themusicteacher]

In what way is a school a decidely different animal to a business? They may have different objectives but anyone claiming that you can't apply business principles to something like a school would be more likely to trigger my I AM A MORON alert than someone who does.

Wow, where to start?

A business exists for one of two purposes: to either a) make something and sell it at a profit or, b) provide a service or product to people and make a profit while doing so. This is done almost exclusively for people who are demanding that service or product and the people who pay for such things are, without exception, ultimately adults (you know, the people that have the money).

Schools exist to inculcate knowledge and skills into children. This is not done (in most cases) at a profit and is mandatory (that is, we make kids go whether they, or their parents, want the service or not). We teach young people, who grow increasingly agitated with out attempts to educate them as they get older, a bunch of things they can't always see the immediate value in, things they don't have a previous interest in and things they don't come across in everyday life (when was the last time you saw calculus graffitied on a wall?) and make them earn a grade for it, refusing to let them move on (in theory) if they don't do what's necessary. Are we getting the picture yet?

Schools are not businesses. Students (and the public in general) are not consumers. They do not get to decide what is taught or simply take their business elsewhere (they can move to a new district if they'd like but the requirements will be the same). We are there to tell them to do things they don't always have a prediliction to doing on their own, to tell them things they don't want to hear (like "evolution is true" or "you play with no noticeable musicality"), to track their progress and to help prepare them for life in a complex world in which they are expected to be a productive, educated member of a free and open society.

Schools are nothing like businesses and the sooner people realize this, the better off we'll be.

[Saggy]

Wow, where to start?

A business exists for one of two purposes: to either a) make something and sell it at a profit or, b) provide a service or product to people and make a profit while doing so. This is done almost exclusively for people who are demanding that service or product and the people who pay for such things are, without exception, ultimately adults (you know, the people that have the money).

Schools exist to inculcate knowledge and skills into children. This is not done (in most cases) at a profit and is mandatory (that is, we make kids go whether they, or their parents, want the service or not). We teach young people, who grow increasingly agitated with out attempts to educate them as they get older, a bunch of things they can't always see the immediate value in, things they don't have a previous interest in and things they don't come across in everyday life (when was the last time you saw calculus graffitied on a wall?) and make them earn a grade for it, refusing to let them move on (in theory) if they don't do what's necessary. Are we getting the picture yet?

Schools are not businesses. Students (and the public in general) are not consumers. They do not get to decide what is taught or simply take their business elsewhere (they can move to a new district if they'd like but the requirements will be the same). We are there to tell them to do things they don't always have a prediliction to doing on their own, to tell them things they don't want to hear (like "evolution is true" or "you play with no noticeable musicality"), to track their progress and to help prepare them for life in a complex world in which they are expected to be a productive, educated member of a free and open society.

Schools are nothing like businesses and the sooner people realize this, the better off we'll be.

Move to the back of the bus, musicteacher. Schools are becoming businesses, it's known as the charter school movement, and O has appointed a big cheerleader as Sec. of Education, Arne Duncan.

And, in NY, there was recently a big flap when Major BooBerg (the snow sweepers showed up late in the last storm and the mayor's ratings tanked) just replaced the outgoing Chancellor of Education, pulled out of the business community, with Cathy Black, from business, Black and Decker or some such, with no education experience at all as his replacement.

Incidentally, Duncan recently announced that 80% of the nations schools are 'failing'. Can that possibly be true? I don't believe it.

[Dancing David]

In what way is a school a decidely different animal to a business? They may have different objectives but anyone claiming that you can't apply business principles to something like a school would be more likely to trigger my I AM A MORON alert than someone who does.

Because a school runs very differently than business and in most ways are much leaner than corporations.

the overhead on schools is a lrge cost afters alaries, there are not a whole lot of efficiencies that are not already part of the system.

The private businesses taht tried to take on public schools have backed away, why is that?

[Dancing David]

Move to the back of the bus, musicteacher. Schools are becoming businesses, it's known as the charter school movement, and O has appointed a big cheerleader as Sec. of Education, Arne Duncan.

And, in NY, there was recently a big flap when Major BooBerg (the snow sweepers showed up late in the last storm and the mayor's ratings tanked) just replaced the outgoing Chancellor of Education, pulled out of the business community, with Cathy Black, from business, Black and Decker or some such, with no education experience at all as his replacement.

Incidentally, Duncan recently announced that 80% of the nations schools are 'failing'. Can that possibly be true? I don't believe it.

Except charter schools receive extra money, why is that?
And they can screen their students?
Why is that?

Why do charter schools need extra money ?

[bigred]

In what way is a school a decidely different animal to a business? They may have different objectives but anyone claiming that you can't apply business principles to something like a school would be more likely to trigger my I AM A MORON alert than someone who does.
Sorry but you don't make final Jeopardy and thx for playing. :cool: Happily others have saved me additional keystrokes and thx to them.

[Fnord]

How about using standardized tests to evaluate teachers?

The assumption being that if they do not understand the subject matter, then they would be less effective teachers of that subject matter, and shouldn't be allowed to teach it.

[bigred]

Because being a good teacher is about FAR more than knowing the subject matter. That's not even the most important criteria (tho it's obviously very important). Being able to "reach" the kids (and handle them) is far more important.

[Vortigern99]

How about using standardized tests to evaluate teachers?

The assumption being that if they do not understand the subject matter, then they would be less effective teachers of that subject matter, and shouldn't be allowed to teach it.

I can't speak for other states, but in Texas, yes -- you have to pass a content exam in the subject you want to teach, and for the appropriate grade level, before you can be considered employable in that position.

Then, as you teach the subject, lo and behold: You learn even more about it because you are reading the material right along with the students.

So the model you're asking for is already in place, albeit inversely.

[Fnord]

But are Texas teachers required to periodically retake the content exam?

[Vortigern99]

I don't know, but I can find out on Monday by contacting the company which is providing my certification. I can't seem to find the answer on the 'Net.

Meanwhile, please explain why you think a teacher, who has studied and passed the appropriate content exam, and is immersed in the subject on a daily basis -- reading the material and evaluating students' grasp of the information -- needs to take an additional test to show that s/he knows the subject.

[Fnord]

To demonstrate that not only do they know the subject matter as it stood on the day of their first content exam, but to also demonstrate that they've kept current with any changes, omissions and amendments to the subject matter.

While we're at it, let's abolish the tenure system.

[Vortigern99]

I believe in self-motivation.
I believe in homework.
I believe in classroom discipline.
I believe in administrative support.
I believe in parental involvement.
I believe in promotion by merit.
I believe in self-representation.
I believe in measurable results.
I believe in earning privileges.

I could never be a teacher.

I believe in/support all of these concepts/ideas/goals, and I am earning my teaching certificate while teaching high school at what is roundly considered the "worst" inner city school in Austin.

Why you think these ideas and goals are mutually exclusive from public school teaching remains a mystery, especially given that your sole experience with the profession has been military tutoring.

[Vortigern99]

To demonstrate that not only do they know the subject matter as it stood on the day of their first content exam, but to also demonstrate that they've kept current with any changes, omissions and amendments to the subject matter.

4 years ago, a teacher answered this question (http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070215071248AAfAvy6) on Yahoo Answers:

Teachers are constantly tested!

Formally:
We take an exam to become a teacher (I took 7 to be a certified teacher in Hawaii, and 3 to be a certified teacher in Michigan).
We have to take college and continuing education classes to keep our teaching certificates. Some of these classes require us to pass tests, others have projects and papers that test our knowledge in a different way.

Informally:
Every day in class, students ask questions that test our knowledge of subject matter. Good teachers can either answer the questions or find the information (or help students find the information).

I guess in the end, the reason we don't have as many tests as often as you do is that we've already shown that we know the material because we had to or we wouldn't have graduated from college. However, we are still tested. Teachers who don't know their stuff eventually get weeded out of the classroom either by parents who want their kids to have the best education possible, or administrators who want their teachers to be the best possible.

I will also add that when new textbooks are printed, incorporating new information/processes/ideas, teachers are the first to read them and so "demonstrate that they've kept current with any changes, omissions and amendments to the subject matter".

While we're at it, let's abolish the tenure system.

Can you give us an idea as to why you want this?

[Fnord]

Why you think these ideas and goals are mutually exclusive from public school teaching remains a mystery, especially given that your sole experience with the profession has been military tutoring.

I do not think that.

Please re-read Post #47 (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=6912580&postcount=47) in this thread for the full explanation.

Basically, my idealism would get me into trouble with parents, administrators, and school boards.

("I speak, you listen ... I teach, you learn ... that's the deal ...")

[Fnord]

... Can you give us an idea as to why you want this?

Abolition of tenure? Sure. To better enable school systems to remove teachers from their positions when those teachers' levels of performance drop to (or below) marginal levels. Also, to help prevent those instances when students register complaints against a teacher, only to be told "Our hands are tied; she has tenure", and get sent back to the same teacher for even more abuse or indifferent treatment.

[Vortigern99]

Basically, my idealism would get me into trouble with parents, administrators, and school boards.

("I speak, you listen ... I teach, you learn ... that's the deal ...")

I get ya. My own idealism has already caused me some trouble in my current position, as my refusal to allow disruptive, rude and/or uncooperative behavior in my classroom has led me to raise my voice and to send students out of the class.

Evidently, in my first week, the administration considered removing me because they would prefer that I handle such behavior in the classroom, rather than burdening the Assistant Principals with all my discipline cases.

I've now learned to walk the thin line between absolute intolerance to disruption and redirecting students in a more constructive way. I will still send a troublemaker out of the room as a last resort, but by necessity I've developed other strategies to cope with them first.

"I speak, you listen ... I teach, you learn ... that's the deal ..."

^ ^ This is my basic philosophy and approach to teaching, as well. I'm rather uncompromising about it, and when students do not abide by it I'm known to get rather unhappy with them. However, I am learning to pick my battles with a more discriminating eye. :cool:

[Vortigern99]

Abolition of tenure? Sure. To better enable school systems to remove teachers from their positions when those teachers' levels of performance drop to (or below) marginal levels. Also, to help prevent those instances when students register complaints against a teacher, only to be told "Our hands are tied; she has tenure", and get sent back to the same teacher for even more abuse or indifferent treatment.

I agree with this position in part, with the proviso that some students (the above-mentioned discipline cases) will complain about good, tough, on-task teachers in order to remove them from the classroom so that they, the students in question, can go back to being lazy and getting away with murder. Many students lie constantly in order to get their way.

I've already had this happen to me, and I've been teaching for less than a month. So it's something to keep in mind.

But no, like you I don't think that a bad or abusive teacher should be allowed to remain in their position simply because they've been around for awhile. There has to be some middle ground where an ineffective teacher can be removed, but that the administration does not cave in to every student complaint that's fired their way.

[blutoski]

I've already had this happen to me, and I've been teaching for less than a month. So it's something to keep in mind.

This is essentially what turned me off of teaching after I did a couple of years' volunteering to help a highschool teacher do Biology 12.

I didn't like hanging around with 16-year-olds and their petty social competition when I was 16, and I learned I liked it even less as an adult.

Anybody who thinks students will evaluate their teachers objectively is living in a fantasy world.

[Vortigern99]

I've found, in my extensive three months of substitute teaching and three weeks of longterm teaching (;)), that most students are respectful, honest and genuinely interested in learning.

Then there is a middle strata of indifferent, apathetic students, and a tiny fraction (say 5% of the whole) who are lying, disrespectful troublemakers.

Make of that what you will.

[blutoski]

Incidentally, Duncan recently announced that 80% of the nations schools are 'failing'. Can that possibly be true? I don't believe it.

It's possible for very high values of 'pass'.

It's entirely up to the person who's evaluating them to define the pass/fail threshold.

[blutoski]

How about using standardized tests to evaluate teachers?

The assumption being that if they do not understand the subject matter, then they would be less effective teachers of that subject matter, and shouldn't be allowed to teach it.

The problem is that the assumption seems unjustified.

Subject matter expertise is necessary but insufficient for teaching the subject. Teaching is its own skillset, independent of the subject matter being taught.

(How many of us have had a ****** math teacher who was a PhD in math? - I did)

My personal opinion is that the most important teacher skill (but not the only important skill) in highschool is classroom management.

[blutoski]

Abolition of tenure? Sure. To better enable school systems to remove teachers from their positions when those teachers' levels of performance drop to (or below) marginal levels. Also, to help prevent those instances when students register complaints against a teacher, only to be told "Our hands are tied; she has tenure", and get sent back to the same teacher for even more abuse or indifferent treatment.

I'm not sure I've ever heard of a teacher getting away with 'abuse' because of tenure. Tenure just means the accuser and administration would have to prove the abuse really took place before terminating the teacher (not an unreasonable situation, in my opinion).

Probationary (untenured) teachers can be dismissed without proof of wrongdoing, is the difference. ie: without cause.

[Dancing David]

To demonstrate that not only do they know the subject matter as it stood on the day of their first content exam, but to also demonstrate that they've kept current with any changes, omissions and amendments to the subject matter.

While we're at it, let's abolish the tenure system.

Wow, while we are at it, what about principals just firing incompetant staff, they can. So why don't they?
Why not fire the principals and the superintendants?

So which standardized test is there for class room management skills?
What standardized test is there for teaching to low, middle, high?
What standardized test is there for coping with behavioral issues?

[Dancing David]

Abolition of tenure? Sure. To better enable school systems to remove teachers from their positions when those teachers' levels of performance drop to (or below) marginal levels.

And how is that preformance measured, so it does not become just crony favoring?

Also, to help prevent those instances when students register complaints against a teacher, only to be told "Our hands are tied; she has tenure", and get sent back to the same teacher for even more abuse or indifferent treatment.

When, where and what happened Fnord?

Put it out there, did they go to their schools board, what exactly was the issues and when did it happen.

Most contracts allow for discipline, remediation and termination. So exactly what happened, when and where?

[Malerin]

The problem is that the assumption seems unjustified.

Subject matter expertise is necessary but insufficient for teaching the subject. Teaching is its own skillset, independent of the subject matter being taught.

(How many of us have had a ****** math teacher who was a PhD in math? - I did)

My personal opinion is that the most important teacher skill (but not the only important skill) in highschool is classroom management.

This is true in all the grade levels.

[mikeyx]

I used to think that if the majority of students in a classroom failed some standardized examination, that the teacher should somehow be held accountable. Now, after a series of well-publicized strikes (as reported in the CNN article, "Why America's Teachers are Enraged (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html?hpt=T2)"), I am no longer certain that teachers are the sole cause of student failure.

Yes, it really does take some of us a little longer to see the obvious, but that is not the point I am trying to make, so please don't bag on me for not seeing it sooner. This quote from the article is what gave me that oh-so necessary "DOING!" moment:



So let's say that more than half of a fifth-grade class has failed some standardized exam, and their teacher, Mrs. Strawman, is facing removal from her position, in spite of numerous reports of how compassionate, dedicated, motivated, and knowledgeable she is.

What factors, aside from Mrs. Strawman's ability and willingness to teach, could be measured, how can those measurements be made, how should the measurements be reported, and what should be done about the findings?

I would really hate to see yet another another generation of teachers get the shaft while the next go-around of the latest educational theories and their applications fail, especially when the future lives of the students (and their teachers) are at stake.

Results and or Witch hunt, failure is punished by trial by ordeal. We're not midevial enough any more.

[chrisgarneau22]

There are bad teachers but I don't think we have a bad teacher epidemic. I think the bigger problem is performance descrepencies by relative SES levels of respective school districts.

[Dancing David]

Thank you!

[mikeyx]

I used to think that if the majority of students in a classroom failed some standardized examination, that the teacher should somehow be held accountable. Now, after a series of well-publicized strikes (as reported in the CNN article, "Why America's Teachers are Enraged (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html?hpt=T2)"), I am no longer certain that teachers are the sole cause of student failure.

Yes, it really does take some of us a little longer to see the obvious, but that is not the point I am trying to make, so please don't bag on me for not seeing it sooner. This quote from the article is what gave me that oh-so necessary "DOING!" moment:



So let's say that more than half of a fifth-grade class has failed some standardized exam, and their teacher, Mrs. Strawman, is facing removal from her position, in spite of numerous reports of how compassionate, dedicated, motivated, and knowledgeable she is.

What factors, aside from Mrs. Strawman's ability and willingness to teach, could be measured, how can those measurements be made, how should the measurements be reported, and what should be done about the findings?

I would really hate to see yet another another generation of teachers get the shaft while the next go-around of the latest educational theories and their applications fail, especially when the future lives of the students (and their teachers) are at stake.

Taser toting goon squads

[themusicteacher]

Move to the back of the bus, musicteacher. Schools are becoming businesses, it's known as the charter school movement, and O has appointed a big cheerleader as Sec. of Education, Arne Duncan.

And, in NY, there was recently a big flap when Major BooBerg (the snow sweepers showed up late in the last storm and the mayor's ratings tanked) just replaced the outgoing Chancellor of Education, pulled out of the business community, with Cathy Black, from business, Black and Decker or some such, with no education experience at all as his replacement.

Incidentally, Duncan recently announced that 80% of the nations schools are 'failing'. Can that possibly be true? I don't believe it.

I suppose I should have discerned between "education" and "school" but the merits of the argument are the same and I noticed you didn't refute them.

The only reason schools are becoming more like businesses is that people erroneously believe they should or even can be like a business. They can't. At least schools with real educational goals flunk some students or tell them they can't graduate. A school run like a business will be a diploma mill because they'll just be doing what the customer paid them to do: graduate them. They didn't pay for an education, they paid for the piece of paper that says they got an education. This is the real problem with for-profit schools: they treat students and parents like consumers and only want to please them. Real education is about proving to the teacher you can do it the right way and that you understand the material, not "getting what you paid for" unless you are committed to learning.

[Dancing David]

Um charter schools are not doing that well, they need extra money and special screening of students to function. The for profit movement has died.

ETA: Saggy has long left the thread.

[MummRa]

I love reading all the amazing arguments in this thread. You folks put the nail on the head better than I ever could.

I love teaching my kids, but it is very hard to get them involved if there is no follow-through at home. For my money, parent involvement (and how much parents value teachers and the educational pursuit itself) is the thing most necessary for student success. When the student, their parents, and I can work as a team, things go very well and 95% of kids improve. When parent support is lacking, and the student's motivation follows suit, unfortunately in many cases there is little I can do. :(

And yeah, I think using one test score to grade kids (and teachers) is BS. I teach dirt-poor English Learners who are miles behind the rich white kids (whom I've also taught). For most of these kids, the only thing keeping them from rich-kid achievement levels is the fact that they have only known English a few years, and their parents (half of whom can't even speak English) are away all day working 3 jobs so they can keep their home.

And don't even get me started on kids who bomb the test because they were mad that day, or stayed up all night playing Halo and then came to school on an empty stomach. Oy.....

[INRM]

The last thing we need is holding parents accountable. How would you enforce this? This just sounds like a great way of justifying more government surveillance into the lives of American citizens