7 ms·

Perhaps "they did not understand the idea of 'merit pay'" because many of the teachers in Finland are of a different breed than many of the people who end up te

Perhaps "they did not understand the idea of 'merit pay'" because many of the teachers in Finland are of a different breed than many of the people who end up teaching in the US: "McKinsey's work with school systems in more than 50 countries suggests this is an important gap in the U.S. debate, because the world's top performing school systems--Singapore, Finland, South Korea--make a different choice. They recruit, develop and retain what this report will call 'top third+' students as one of their central education strategies, and they've acheived extraordinary results. These systems recruit 100% of their teacher corops from the top third of the academic cohort, and then screen for other important qualities as well. In the U.S., by contrast, 23% of new teachers come from the top third, and just 14% in high poverty schools, which find it especially difficult to attract and retain talented teachers. It is remarkably large difference in approach, and in results." [1] Taking this into account, it's silly to argue that since they have tenure, too, tenure isn't the problem here. They already have the right people teaching. We need to fire many of the people who are currently teaching. Also, the U.S. spends a higher percent of GDP on education, so blaming spending seems odd. [2] Finally, I'm really sick of the way Diane Ravitch constantly slams Teach For America. The U.S. needs better people teaching. TFA makes some of those people think about teaching. It's getting teaching in the same ballpark of prestige as consulting, banking, law school, medical school, etc for students coming out of top colleges. Nothing else comes close to doing that on the same scale. Even if it is true that TFA teachers aren't noticeably better in years 1-2 than a typical experienced teacher (and I don't believe that is the case), it's still a great program. [1] http://www.mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education/Closing_the_talent_gap.pdf http://www.mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education... [2] http://www.mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education/Closing_talent_gap_appendix.pdf http://www.mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education...

kiba 15y ago
I would think that people in Singapore and South Korea considers education very important and thus students in these countries try very hard to get really good grade.
- tuukkah 15y ago
  Whereas in Finland students don't appreciate their top-of-the-notch, free education. According to research, they feel negative about the school and the teachers, they are unmotivated, they underperform and they have mental health problems. Makes their test results doubly impressive, I would say, and shows that there's still room for a lot of improvement in the world of education.
  - 0x12 15y ago
    You can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink. Without the water the horse dies for sure, with the water at least it stands a chance. If those students are that unmotivated then that's one more feather in the cap of the teachers that they hold on to what they are doing in spite of such resistance.
  - yzhengyu 15y ago
    Ironically, I greatly admire the Finnish system. They got something very, very correct if their teachers can get a bunch of "unmotivated Finnish children and teenagers" to score so well in so many exams. As a Singaporean, I would amend the original statement to say 'we treat our schooling very seriously'. But, yes, we do treat our academics very seriously - in fact, I personally believe we take it too seriously to the point of obsession.
redthrowaway 15y ago
>Taking this into account, it's silly to argue that since they have tenure, too, tenure isn't the problem here. They already have the right people teaching. We need to fire many of the people who are currently teaching. If you want to fire a big chunk of your teachers, that's fine. You just need to ensure the people you are replacing them with are better, and you do that by having higher requirements, paying them more, and giving them a better environment to work in. That means smaller classes, more autonomy, not relying on standardized tests for compensation, and a whole host of other things the US fails at. Let's say you had a big tech company with thousands of mediocre programmers. You want to fire them and hire better ones, but before you do that you have to ask why you had so many lousy programmers in the first place. Why did good programmers decide not to work for your company, and how will you both attract them and convince them to stay? The US seems to think it can get highly qualified teachers by providing working environments akin to code monkey cubicle farms, and they're simply wrong.
- jseliger 15y ago
  you do that by having higher requirements Actually, the problem is that we can't predict what makes good teachers. Studies have consistently shown—see my post below for more—that Master's degrees, for instance, don't predict success. Malcolm Gladwell writes about this issue here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_gladwell http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_... . That means smaller classes, more autonomy, not relying on standardized tests for compensation, and a whole host of other things the US fails at. The first doesn't measurably improve outcome either. The second sounds good. The third is a bit of red herring: I don't know any serious reformer who says that performance should be measured entirely based on testing or that testing is perfect. It isn't. But if you don't have some standardized measure, you can't even make comparisons.
jseliger 15y ago
Great post. I actually assembled a compendium of articles about the teacher / school situation: http://jseliger.com/2009/11/12/susan-engel-doesnt-get http://jseliger.com/2009/11/12/susan-engel-doesnt-get . It's virtually impossible to read the New Yorker piece on New York City's "Rubber Rooms" or the L.A. Weekly on the "Dance of the Lemons" without realizing how perverse educational incentives in the U.S. really are.
gamble 15y ago
I think it's hard to overemphasize how much of an effect the respect accorded to teachers in Finland draws in the most motivated and skilled. Teachers in the US are all but regarded with contempt, and in many cases deserve it. Teaching hasn't been an aspirational profession since the women's rights movement made it possible for intelligent women to aspire to more than nursing or teaching.

kiba 15y ago

I would think that people in Singapore and South Korea considers education very important and thus students in these countries try very hard to get really good grade.

tuukkah 15y ago
Whereas in Finland students don't appreciate their top-of-the-notch, free education. According to research, they feel negative about the school and the teachers, they are unmotivated, they underperform and they have mental health problems. Makes their test results doubly impressive, I would say, and shows that there's still room for a lot of improvement in the world of education.
- 0x12 15y ago
  You can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink. Without the water the horse dies for sure, with the water at least it stands a chance. If those students are that unmotivated then that's one more feather in the cap of the teachers that they hold on to what they are doing in spite of such resistance.
- yzhengyu 15y ago
  Ironically, I greatly admire the Finnish system. They got something very, very correct if their teachers can get a bunch of "unmotivated Finnish children and teenagers" to score so well in so many exams. As a Singaporean, I would amend the original statement to say 'we treat our schooling very seriously'. But, yes, we do treat our academics very seriously - in fact, I personally believe we take it too seriously to the point of obsession.

redthrowaway 15y ago

>Taking this into account, it's silly to argue that since they have tenure, too, tenure isn't the problem here. They already have the right people teaching. We need to fire many of the people who are currently teaching. If you want to fire a big chunk of your teachers, that's fine. You just need to ensure the people you are replacing them with are better, and you do that by having higher requirements, paying them more, and giving them a better environment to work in. That means smaller classes, more autonomy, not relying on standardized tests for compensation, and a whole host of other things the US fails at. Let's say you had a big tech company with thousands of mediocre programmers. You want to fire them and hire better ones, but before you do that you have to ask why you had so many lousy programmers in the first place. Why did good programmers decide not to work for your company, and how will you both attract them and convince them to stay? The US seems to think it can get highly qualified teachers by providing working environments akin to code monkey cubicle farms, and they're simply wrong.

jseliger 15y ago
you do that by having higher requirements Actually, the problem is that we can't predict what makes good teachers. Studies have consistently shown—see my post below for more—that Master's degrees, for instance, don't predict success. Malcolm Gladwell writes about this issue here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_gladwell http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_... . That means smaller classes, more autonomy, not relying on standardized tests for compensation, and a whole host of other things the US fails at. The first doesn't measurably improve outcome either. The second sounds good. The third is a bit of red herring: I don't know any serious reformer who says that performance should be measured entirely based on testing or that testing is perfect. It isn't. But if you don't have some standardized measure, you can't even make comparisons.

jseliger 15y ago

Great post. I actually assembled a compendium of articles about the teacher / school situation: http://jseliger.com/2009/11/12/susan-engel-doesnt-get http://jseliger.com/2009/11/12/susan-engel-doesnt-get . It's virtually impossible to read the New Yorker piece on New York City's "Rubber Rooms" or the L.A. Weekly on the "Dance of the Lemons" without realizing how perverse educational incentives in the U.S. really are.

gamble 15y ago

I think it's hard to overemphasize how much of an effect the respect accorded to teachers in Finland draws in the most motivated and skilled. Teachers in the US are all but regarded with contempt, and in many cases deserve it. Teaching hasn't been an aspirational profession since the women's rights movement made it possible for intelligent women to aspire to more than nursing or teaching.