Chambers wrote:

> BTW, I was under the impression that teachers would be graded by the 
> aggregate results of their students; not that they would be fired for a 
> single student failing.

That's about right. Some of the testing is ridiculous, though. Most of 
her students enter her classroom at extremely low literacy levels, and 
leave at almost where they should be, but due to the way the test is 
structured the end score of those tests show absolutely no growth.

By 2012 there must be a 100% passing rate, or the teachers involved may 
not be retained. (The key word is may, it's very possible the teacher 
will be retained, but may be subject to disciplinary action.)

Observation of the teacher in the classroom, general performance metrics 
of the *teacher* (How well does she manage the classroom, does the 
teacher use effective techniques, does the teacher innovate in 
demonstrating things in a way the students can understand, is the 
teacher engaging the students. Does the teacher share ideas with other 
staff. Does the teacher provide adequate one-on-one support for those 
students who are struggling. There are plenty of ways a teacher can be 
evaluated. How well a student whose parents couldn't care less about 
sitting down with their kids and helping with homework, does not 
establish good habits, such as a bedtime so the student isn't prone to 
falling asleep in class, etc is not the way to evaluate a teacher, 
because these are factors beyond her control.)

Post a reply to this message