After reading this article, I am absolutely terrified of what is to come in the future for the teaching profession. I am not saying that I do not agree with evaluating teachers; obviously that is necessary to make sure students are getting a proper education. But how do we evaluate them that takes everything into consideration? Can it even be done? To use the "value-added assessments of teachers — which use improvements in student test scores to evaluate teacher effectiveness" seems absolutely ridiculous to me. Who on earth is proposing this? Do "they" not realize that test scores do not mean proficiency, and that there are a thousand factors to think about when making the claim about a "good or bad" teacher? Do they not consider that if they are only looking at test scores that teachers who rank the highest might have just taught to the test, and now that it's over their students don't remember any material that they had to "drill and kill"? What about us special education teachers? Do we have to suffer and have our names slandered because our students are making slow progress? I would like to start seeing ACTUAL TEACHERS be involved in making decisions on how we should be evaluated. People who hold positions in office and do not have teaching experience, and don't even hold any degree related to education should not be the ones deciding our future!
Grading teachers by students' test scores seems so ridiculous to many of us in the teaching profession, yet we're not the ones making decisions...why not? We should be able to say "yes, please come evaluate me, but also look at my students and see what challenges we have to overcome in the classroom before giving me an F". What about teachers who are dedicated to teaching and inspiring children, but teach in a school district that can't afford pencils and paper, let along new technologies and text books. What about the teachers who are given more than 40 students in a classroom to try to manage their behavior, let alone give them all a quality education. I can only hope that people such as Arne Duncan will start to consider these factors before implementing more hurdles for teachers to overcome, and before expecting a full turnaround in "improved assessments designed to measure critical knowledge and higher-order thinking skills". I also hope that in trying to prepare all of our "states to work jointly toward a system of common academic standards that builds toward college and career readiness", that programs such as music, acting, art, and other fine arts are not forgotten. I realize that those subjects are hardly gradable...what are they going to do, fail a teacher because all of their students can't play their E minor scale from memory? We need to remember that in our process to "race to the top", we may be losing many things that define us as a culture, and losing things that are, what I consider to be, just as important as the textbook material. Studies show that children who learn music have better math and science skills, and language skills, so please let these teachers teach also, even though our students aren't being graded on those subjects at the national level.
Well that was quite longer than I expected, but I still have much more to say on this issue. The summary of my rant; Don't rank and evaluate teachers strictly by what their students fill out on a bubble sheet.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have had the same thoughts and concerns. I agree that teachers should be kept accountable. However, good scores do not mean the teacher is good and bad scores do not mean the teacher is bad. Besides the fact that defining a teacher as good or bad is all based on opinion and relativity. The only solution I can come up with is micromanagement, micromanagement, MICROMANAGEMENT! Obviously it starts with the teacher and his/her own reflection and continuing education. Fellow teachers could also keep each other in check, although this could get tricky. The important next step up is the principal. The principal needs to visit classrooms on a regular basis, provide valuable professional development, and be willing to discipline and fire, if necessary, those who are not contributing to the goals of the school and high quality education for EACH student. The superintendent then ensures that the principal has a solid view on education and is monitoring the teachers.
ReplyDeleteyes! I completely agree with both of you ladies. I feel that once a teacher reaches his or her 'ten-year' they feel that the union will help them keep their job and they will not need to worry about being fired and/or replaced. I feel that teachers do need to be evaluated at times to be sure they are still being motivated and helpful for the students learning. I think it is important for teachers to know how they are doing from another point of view but also to realize that it is JUST one other opinion. I think this article is a bit extreme and there was probably more than this as a factor for his life ending, but it is still important to see the outputs that can come from evaluations.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with all three of you! It's so scary to think about! I think evaluating teachers needs to happen, there are so many teachers that I have seen and I don't understand how they are still teachers.. they're horrible and the staff and students usually don't like them. I think evaluations need to be done but not based solely on a standardized test. I agree with Katie that the principle needs to be very involved and evaluate the teachers frequently.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of you as well!! All teachers need to be evaluated, especially after "ten-year". I feel like eventually teachers get comfortable and slow down on motivation and finding news way to help teach their students. I do agree with the first post not only should you look at what the students are scoring but also you need evaluate the teachers work. Just because the students are scoring low does not mean the teacher is failing.
ReplyDelete