Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
wbw
climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 12, 2011 - 05:39pm PT
|
Coincidence? I think not. Look to these States and Countries as roll models for best education practices.
They fund education properly
The teachers are Unionized
The teachers are professional
The teachers are well respected
The students perform and achieve
*If* Massachusetts and Finland are truly the best in education, and yes I've seen those rankings, your explanations as to why seem to be more about educational policy. That is different than "education practices", which would imply that the teachers in those places are superior.
I've taught kids that have come to my school from Singapore in advanced level math classes. Singapore also ranks very high. The kids from Singapore did not out-perform the local kids in my class.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2011 - 05:51pm PT
|
Harihari,
I agree with your characterizations of both the EU and USA tests. What frustrates me is that in the US, the teachers' unions don't advocate for an EU-style examination. They advocate against any comprehensive examination of student mastery of their subject matter. In my part of California, the slogan is against "high stakes testing," a euphemism for any examination used to evaluate student outcomes or teachers' effectiveness.
jstan,
I think most people attempting to evaluate teacher performance recognize that the issue is value added. The controversy is over the method of evaluation. The usual argument I hear is "what if, for reasons having nothing to do with the student's mastery of the material, the student did poorly on the one and only test we use as a measurement?" Since we all agree that this is possible, they then conclude that "high stakes tests" are an invalid measurement.
Of course, that may be a valid argument about a particular student's results, but what about a teacher, who has many classes and many students? Unless the reason for poor performance is somehting like a bomb threat in the middle of the exam, there is no reason to believe that one student having a bad day means that all students will pick the same bad day.
Even worse, I never hear a reasonable alternative to comprehensive exams, other than the grades the teachers give them as a result of numerous evaluations, in the form of tests, quizzes, homework, group projects, essays, etc. Unfortunately, most of us have little faith in using that as the sole measure because we've dealt with too many students with good grades and poor skills.
If the teachers unions were relevant in this debate, they would do us a favor, but they generally have nothing useful (or even thoughtful) to say.
I'm sorry, Klimmer, but the governmental "intrustion" into public education isn't about some vast right-wing conspiracy,its about improving a product that many of us feel can be better. Yes, I think the biggest single factor in student achievement is what goes on outside of school, but what goes on in school matters greatly. Let's not pretend that nothing is wrong.
John
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2011 - 06:34pm PT
|
JE,
You're not argueing with me alone, you are argueing with many who know exactly what is happening behind closed doors and what their intentions are.
PhD Diane Ravitch was an insider. She knows what she is talking about. She knows what the GOP, Corporate America, and the Rich Elite want to do to public education in America.
Read her book. She was there. She left for that very reason. She knows as well as many others that now know. Yes, they do have an agenda. And their agenda isn't good. It is greedy and evil.
She in many ways is a whistle-blower to their ill intentions.
|
|
harihari
Trad climber
Squampton
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2011 - 06:43pm PT
|
It is generally agreed that 85-90% of student achievement can be traced back to socioeconomic status and other non-school factors. Within a school, teachers can make a significant difference "within" that last 10% of achievement...but the difference between mediocre and awesome is not that great.
Given that this is the case, it is not surprising that teacher unions resist standardised/high-stakes testing and merit pay, etc. If you were being evaluated on something that you had only 10% control over, how would you feel?
My experiences in Canada are that while teachers can tremendously affect how much kids like school, or a specific class, we can only have a small effect on how good kids are at any given subject (within 1 year). If we get a kid whose parents don't speak English, and who doesn't read for fun, and whose parents (as with many immigrant families) are working 3 jobs, no matter how much fun I make the class or hwo good my strategies are, I am not gonna get that kid from a C to an A his his/her reading or writing.
Canada is actually going the opposite way of the US regarding testing. In BC, for example, there are no mandatory SATs for college/Uni, only one mandatory final exam in high school (Eng or comm 12), four other mandatory exams along the way (math, sci, eng in gr 10; socials in gr 11). All BC universities have dropped Provincial exam requirements as a basis for admission-- they now use high-school marks, plus extracurricular stuff, plus the Eng 12 mark.
BC kids-- by any standard--- are some of the best in the world, and they face very little standardised testing, and their teachers' Union is militant and strong. The research is clear: socioeconomic equality (or as much fo it as possible), professional teaching, lots of government support for families and kids, good medical care, etc, make HUGE differences in educational outcomes.
chris
chris
|
|
HuecoRat
Trad climber
NJ
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2011 - 07:30pm PT
|
There are several factors that make evaluating teachers a difficult task. The consensus among the posts on this thread seems to be that standardized testing is not the best answer. I agree, but am waiting for a better idea that is workable. I don't know of one. I don't think that standardized tests work, but at the moment they are all we have, and they are all that Governor Christie plans to use.
The biggest problem with teacher evaluation is that it cannot take all the variables into account. Governor Christie wants to use student achievement as the primary indicator. This can only be done equitably if every class has an even distribution of student abilities. Otherwise the teacher of an advanced or honors class has a marked advantage over a teacher who has a remedial or entry level class. The advanced students are going to accomplish more than the other students, so the results of student achievement as an indicator show that the advanced class teacher is the better teacher. That may or may not be true. Do we fire a teacher because the students they were assigned are not as capable as the students which were assigned to someone else? Teachers would be forced to fight to get the better students or lose their jobs. One solution is to make sure that each class has an adequate cross section of all levels of ability, but if we do that we lose all honors classes, advanced placement classes, etc.
One solution many states take is to define "success" in different ways for different students. Again, we run into trouble before we even get started. First off, many classes have a very subjective component that is very hard to identify, much less evaluate. I teach in NJ (where Christie is doing his thing), and the state sets the standards students must meet in their various classes. I'm sure all states do it this way, but I can't speak with any authority about them, so I'll limit my remarks to NJ. The philosophy that guides the state as they set those standards is one that says that every student can and should be successful in every subject (as per Presidential decree). In order to set standards that are attainable by every student, the standards are set for the lowest ability level. After all, no child can be left behind.
So what's the answer? Well, one answer is to move back to the Classical Education model. There are three phases to it:
1 Grammar. Information is given to students and they are required to memorize it.
2 Logic. The relationships between facts are taught.
3 Rhetoric. Students learn to form their own opinions based on the facts and relationships they already know.
This model requires that students meet a uniform (and high) standard or they must repeat the grade.
Current society will never accept it again. Here's an example: Two years ago the New York City school district lost 2 lawsuits within a few months of each other, requiring that the district pay out several million dollars to the plaintiffs. One suit was because a recent graduate was so illiterate that she could not get a job. She claimed that she had been socially promoted instead of held back when she did not do her work. So the schools lost when they allowed a student to move ahead a grade when she had failed every subject. The other suit was brought by the family of a kid who had failed every class in the fourth grade and was going to be held back. His family sued because he would be humiliated to stay in the 4th grade when all his friends would be going on to the 5th grade. The schools lost here because they expected a student to do his work.
The teachers were to blame either way, and the students bore no responsibility.
As an aside, in the original post for this topic, Christie talks about the way that the teachers union is bankrupting the state of New Jersey. What he doesn't mention is the way that our last 4 Governors have been taking money out of the teachers pension fund and have not only failed to repay what they "borrowed," but have made none of the state payments into the account required by law. Now the state is faced with a huge debt that they can't begin to repay. Christie's solution is to try to wreck the union, and to redesign the pension so that he will not have to repay what is owed.
|
|
wbw
climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 12, 2011 - 10:45pm PT
|
The state test in Colorado, the CSAP, does one thing that I think that can be informative about a student. It tracks student progress from year to year. While I agree that the teacher in the affluent school in a highly educated community has many advantages in the standardized testing realm over teachers working in difficult areas in which the community is less supportive of education, I still say that if they are good teachers, their students should be making some kind of measureable progress.
Testing could be one component of a teacher's evaluation. A test could be given to students at the beginning of the year, and at the end of the year. Progress could be measured from the first test to the second, for individual students. I've taught a lot of different levels of kids, and it is the rare kid that makes little to no progress during the year. Whether it is the whiz kid, or the kid that struggles in the subject, it is reasonable to expect that there should be measureable progress.
Other components of the evaluation could involve things such as sponsoring clubs, coaching, getting involved in after school programs, writing letters of recommendation, or any other aspect of getting involved in the school.
There could be a component related to student feedback about the teacher. Another component could relate to professional development.
I'm just throwing out examples, but if the evaluation involved multiple and balanced components, then a teacher could be fairly evaluated. There could be a choice involved, where the teacher chooses a certain number of components that they wish to be evaluated on, from a range of options.
The unions would have us believe that teacher evaluations are not possible, but the real problem is paying for meaningful evaluations. There was a new state law passed last spring in CO that takes away tenure and requires that administrators evaluate every teacher in the building each year, under a much stricter set of criteria. Quite the departure from the typical evaluation, that is done every three years, which usually involves an administrator spending all of 5 minutes in a teacher's classroom, and then writing a bunch of BS to justify the process. The administrators don't really have time to do it once every three years, and somehow the state legislators expect them to do it better and more often. And of course it is all unfunded. Everyone in schools is wondering, how is this going to get done.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2011 - 01:11am PT
|
Here in SDUSD teacher evaluations are every year until tenure (3rd year), and then every other year. After 10 years every 5 years.
Most who do not make it or find that the profession doesn't suit them, or have problems, no classroom control or other issues are usually gone within the first 5 years. They self-select themselves out. It takes a great deal of time, talent, energy, commitment, classroom control, and inspiration, and then the ability to be a really good multi-tasker to be a great teacher. This only comes after many years of teaching.
And then all good teachers will admit they are constantly learning and becoming even better over the years. We also are usually a very motivated group to continue professional development opportunities and always continuing our college education and taking more course work over the years to stay current in our fields or to bring in something new. It is the hardest job you'll do and it can also be the most rewarding. People don't go into teaching for the money. And Summer is usually spent resting up mentally and prepping physically so you can do all over again the next year. Without Summer, I would be spent. I'm exhausted by the time Summer Solstice comes around as are most teachers and students. And you don't get a pay check over summer, unless you spread your paychecks over 12 months rather than the months you actually work. So you are without income during this time. You better be good at saving money and prepping financially for this unemployment time.
"Teach for America" is a joke. They don't get this at all. They think bringing in the brightest from the Ivy leagues or what have you, for just a few years, and then they leave to go onto other very lucrative careers is a wonderful Corporate model and a great success. Those who do it are only doing it as a resume builder, so they can say "I was a teacher" until they land the "better" job. So the students suffer with a very new and inexperienced teacher, and then another comes in to take their place, and then they suffer all over again. We have all experienced "new" teachers. It takes time to know what you are doing and having the true confidence of a seasoned pro. It takes a decade or more to become a really good or great teacher. Not one, two, or three years only on the job will do it. You can be Einstein, but if you don't have good classroom control you can't do squat. No teaching or learning will take place. TFA, give me a break . . .
If a teacher is failing to do their job in a professional manner, at any time the administration can move forward with the process of correcting the problem or removing the teacher.
Teachers don't have tenure, we have due process. The Union is there to see that the system is fair. Every worker in America or else where should have the right to due process. It is about treating others as you would want to be treated, The Golden Rule. Fair and equitable.
Corporate America doesn't work that way. The bottom line is the dollar. All else is meaningless. That is why Corporate America is soul-less. Screw and spit-out workers as cannon fodder, what matters is the bottom line of the share-holders.
There are a few great companies who don't buy into this greed, immoral behavior, and unethical model. They make a great product, they stay in the USA and make good jobs, they are very successful, and they treat their employees very good. As a result they have a very loyal clientele. These kind of companies are rare. They are the exception.
|
|
Todd Gordon
Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2011 - 01:23am PT
|
Me am a teacher....(I mean, I is a teacher...)...Me are a teacher?.....
|
|
wbw
climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 13, 2011 - 10:52am PT
|
Instead of spending so much money on lobbying, the teachers' unions could be paying people to explore the different ways teachers could get evaluated, and incentives for teachers to pursue excellence in their careers. I asked the union rep in our building about whether the union would at least have a conversation about merit pay linked to teacher evaluation. Her response was very predictable. "Yeah, we would have that conversation, except that linking teacher pay to performance is not possible to do fairly."
The unions should be out in front on these types of discussions, and developing ideas that would work for their members, instead of spending millions backing politicians who they think are pro-education, only to find out they got stabbed in the back after the election.
|
|
harihari
Trad climber
Squampton
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2011 - 02:13pm PT
|
Good points. In Canada, time and funding for real evaluations are also limited. If you are going to meaningfully observe a teacher, you need to look at
 how they act/teach in front of kids (3-4 times, in diff classes)
assessment practices
collaborative practices with colleagues
extracurricular stuff
This would IMH0 take ten hours per staff member per evaluation. So, in our school of 85 teachers and 3 admin (2vp and 1p) that's 300 hours per administrator. Want to do it every year? That's almost 8 weeks of evaluation!
Regarding the thing about evaluating teaches based on extracurricular stuff. That's fine...if they are paid to do that work. In Canada, extracurric is strictly voluntary. I and almost all of my colleagues do this stuff (I amm on a committee, and I run the gay/straight alliance, and I am a union rep, and I built a garden) but we aren't paid for it. The other problem here is that not all teachign assignments are the same. Senior English, which I teach, for example, has a staggering markign load. Spanish, on the other hand, is a joke, marking-wise. It's no wonder English teachers are under-represented in coaching etc.
And yes, Yankees, the government-- which is owned by the welathy-- wants to destroy yrou public education. They want robots, not critical thinkers, and they want to pay as little as they can, so that the wealthy can have their mind-bogglingly low tax rates.
chris
chris
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2011 - 04:08pm PT
|
Teacher + Teacher = Alex Honnold.
Cool.
Nice observation, Fort Mental!
John
|
|
wbw
climber
'cross the great divide
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 14, 2011 - 06:30pm PT
|
Italic TextTeacher + Teacher = Alex Honnold.
That is indeed cool. I'm a teacher, my wife is a teacher . . hmmmm.
*If* either of my little kids become climbers, I think I'll do a little more encouraging in the area of not forgetting the rope.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!