Comments on: A Revolving Door for Teachers

By: george.w

george.w — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:55:27 +0000

One of my kids had a Spanish teacher who could not speak Spanish if you told her; “Here’s a million dollars if you could carry on a conversation in Spanish.” They had a “science” teacher who told the class that the Earth is warmer in Summer because it’s closer to the Sun. Another teacher made fun of one of my kids’ friends’ yellow teeth in front of the class. I could go on and I’m sure most parents could too.

There’s a lot of political talk about “school choice” but we can’t even manage to identify bad teachers and give them the boot. I love the idea of starting there.

By: Steve in MI

Steve in MI — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:45:19 +0000

Then you would completely fail to identify good teachers or bad teachers.

One unfortunate reality of the education system is that the economic condition of a student’s family is a stronger predictor of their educational outcome than is the quality of any individual classroom teacher they encounter. That’s why there’s no simple method that will statistically identify teacher quality; the tests have too much of an “input bias” to be statistically reliable.

That means that teacher assessment must be done by experts at the local level. The problem with that is that local authorities are subject to non-educational influences. A few fervid creationists can get elected to a local school board, and absent unions or tenure programs, science-based biology is replaced by Genesis-based biology. That would be satisfying for those who believe in Genesis over science, but damned useless for any student trying to apply what they’d been taught. The same science-versus-religion-and-politics conflict will be found in literature, language, music, math, geology, and physics classes, just to name a few. Unions and tenure programs may have their flaws, but they are useful mechanisms for neutralizing these conflicts.

I can’t agree more with the writers Sam Seaborn quote. However, our real-world local experience with alternative certification has been disastrous. We’re already had a couple of dramatic crash-and-burn episodes from the alternatively certified. It seems that a 12-week crash course may not be nearly enough to prepare even a seasoned professional for the rigors of being outnumbered 30-to-1 with hormone-charged adolescents.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:02:29 +0000

What if we made it more simple and just pegged it to graduation rates and an exit exam?

By: NP

NP — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:53:59 +0000

I agree with you that changes need to be made, but I also agree with Markk.

I didn’t teach for long, but in the short time I was there, I saw the strong emphasis that was put on test scores. It frightens me.

I think putting programs in place that emphasize alternative evaluation (application, one-on-one evaluation, etc.) would be a step in the right direction toward “better” teachers.

By: Markk

Markk — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:24:54 +0000

I’ll put in a point for another side: Competition for teachers is a bad thing. To the extent that any teacher is looking at the results of other teachers (not their methods) they are wasting their time and mental energy. Somehow we have to reward good teachers without making it a “testing” comparison. I don’t want teachers teaching to the measure which any kind of real world “competition” would turn out to be. It sounds bad but I think a better bang for the buck would be to reduce the worst teachers. That I think is really what teacher unions would fear though. Politically or religiously motivated zealots dumping people for bad reasons.

Disclaimer I am not a teacher but have several sibling and cousins elementary and high school teachers.

By: It’s the Thought that Counts » Blog Archive » Carnival of the Elitist Bastards XI

Mon, 30 Mar 2009 02:45:48 +0000

[...] at The Big Stick discusses why a revolving door for teachers isn’t so bad. He argues that alternative certification procedures would allow more qualified and excited [...]