4 ms·
It's easy to fire "ineffective" teachers (quotations used to show the mutability and variability of the term, rather than sarcasm). Even with the supposed diffi
by andrewce 16y ago
It's easy to fire "ineffective" teachers (quotations used to show the mutability and variability of the term, rather than sarcasm). Even with the supposed difficulties presented by tenure, so many school districts are struggling for money that it's a simple matter of invoking the RIF-hammer.
It's harder to identify what makes an teacher ineffective, and harder still to identify what makes an effective teacher.
Even harder still when lesson plans are mandated from up top and are seen as things to "deliver" (like a pizza, or a newspaper). I worked in a school district in which some of my lesson plans were written for me (down to the "Spend 5 minutes on this, 8 minutes on that" level), and was evaluated (on those days) based on my ability to comply with them to the letter. One of the comments I received on an evaluation was "We were hoping you'd show more creativity in your teaching" of a lesson that was assessed on how well I followed a script and how well I got students to follow the script.
Frankly, I think the thing that will truly reform education is an entire change in mindset away from students "doing well on tests" and toward students doing good and interesting and challenging work.
That said, your notion of attending professional development is good not only for struggling teachers, but for everyone. It's stupid to expect teachers to improve if the only thing we give them is a carrot or a stick.
- gruseom 16y agoI agree that standardized tests suck. I distinctly remember how much they suck. A system based on standardized tests is going to suck. But you know what sucks worse? Utterly incompetent teachers. If we can't even identify and get rid of the most egregious offenders - the kind who tell children "I get paid whether you learn or not" and then proceed to read the newspaper in front of the class -- what hope do we have? Everyone always talks about how overwhelmingly complicated these problems are. No doubt that's true, especially if you accept certain premises. But there are also some no-brainers. The ideas that teachers get jobs for life, you can't fire a teacher for underperforming, and layoffs proceed in order of seniority are mind-bogglingly stupid and evil (as Rhee writes, running the schools "for the benefit of the adults in the system, not for the benefit of the kids"). No one can tell me this hasn't had devastating effects. If the best we can do right now is apply crude and mediocre metrics (like standardized tests) to stanch the social hemhorrage that is the failure of our public school system, we'd better do it. Real education, the kind that prepares whole human beings to do great things with their lives, is absolutely what we should shoot for; anyone working as an educator ought to have that in mind at all times. Nevertheless, a system that produces trained rats is not as evil as one that turns out prison fodder.
- bwh2 16y agoAgreed. I'll always take an imperfect assessment over no assessment, and imperfect accountability over no accountability. The "it's too complicated" crowd needs to get on board or out of the way.
- starkness 16y agoA good example of perfect being the enemy of the good (or at least less bad).