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

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Jim Charter wrote:
> 
>> I lasted just four days tutoring in the "No child left behind" effort.
>>
>> Personally, I've never looked back.
> 
> Hmmm. 'No child left behind' My wife was going on about all of the 
> paperwork she was required to file due to this act. I jokingly called it 
> the 'No Piece of Paper Left Behind' act.
> 
> She was telling me yesterday, that by some year (I think 4 years from 
> now, 2012) all students must pass standardized testing, or teachers 
> could lose their jobs. I replied by stating that it was asinine to think 
> that the teacher's performance should be judged by the student's 
> performance on a test. There are MANY more factors that go into the 
> performance of a child in addition to the teacher. You can't help those 
> who are not willing to be helped. Parents who refuse to be involved in 
> their child's education and well being are far more detrimental to that 
> child's ability to learn than a teacher who gave her best effort in the 
> classroom.
Solutions:
- pass on poor (performing) students to other schools
- try to be more attractive to students from good neighbourhoods/wealthy 
parents.
- let the poor performing fail the year before the test
- proclaim the poor performing students ill during the test period
- take many disciplinary actions for futile offenses until they 
'voluntary' leave school before the test.
- ...

At least the first four options are actually used in some form in the 
Netherlands to increase the rating of the school.

Post a reply to this message

"andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message 
news:47E### [at] hotmailcom...
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> Jim Charter wrote:
>>
>>> I lasted just four days tutoring in the "No child left behind" effort.
>>>
>>> Personally, I've never looked back.
>>
>> Hmmm. 'No child left behind' My wife was going on about all of the 
>> paperwork she was required to file due to this act. I jokingly called it 
>> the 'No Piece of Paper Left Behind' act.
>>
>> She was telling me yesterday, that by some year (I think 4 years from 
>> now, 2012) all students must pass standardized testing, or teachers could 
>> lose their jobs. I replied by stating that it was asinine to think that 
>> the teacher's performance should be judged by the student's performance 
>> on a test. There are MANY more factors that go into the performance of a 
>> child in addition to the teacher. You can't help those who are not 
>> willing to be helped. Parents who refuse to be involved in their child's 
>> education and well being are far more detrimental to that child's ability 
>> to learn than a teacher who gave her best effort in the classroom.
> Solutions:
> - pass on poor (performing) students to other schools
> - try to be more attractive to students from good neighbourhoods/wealthy 
> parents.
> - let the poor performing fail the year before the test
> - proclaim the poor performing students ill during the test period
> - take many disciplinary actions for futile offenses until they 
> 'voluntary' leave school before the test.
> - ...
>
> At least the first four options are actually used in some form in the 
> Netherlands to increase the rating of the school.

    I would say: Introduce competition between schools much like our 
football leagues here in the UK. Give the pupils something to be proud of 
and to work for - a challenge. Have league tables. Give them incentive/s. If 
they are in a school that does *very* well, then that pupil has a better 
option of getting a good job and earning more money when they leave. If the 
school doesn't do well, then the pupils are on the scrap-heap and not the 
teachers.

   I wish that was in place when I was young.

     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> "andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message 
> news:47E### [at] hotmailcom...
>> Mike Raiford wrote:
>>> Jim Charter wrote:
>>>
>>>> I lasted just four days tutoring in the "No child left behind" effort.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I've never looked back.
>>> Hmmm. 'No child left behind' My wife was going on about all of the 
>>> paperwork she was required to file due to this act. I jokingly called it 
>>> the 'No Piece of Paper Left Behind' act.
>>>
>>> She was telling me yesterday, that by some year (I think 4 years from 
>>> now, 2012) all students must pass standardized testing, or teachers could 
>>> lose their jobs. I replied by stating that it was asinine to think that 
>>> the teacher's performance should be judged by the student's performance 
>>> on a test. There are MANY more factors that go into the performance of a 
>>> child in addition to the teacher. You can't help those who are not 
>>> willing to be helped. Parents who refuse to be involved in their child's 
>>> education and well being are far more detrimental to that child's ability 
>>> to learn than a teacher who gave her best effort in the classroom.
>> Solutions:
>> - pass on poor (performing) students to other schools
>> - try to be more attractive to students from good neighbourhoods/wealthy 
>> parents.
>> - let the poor performing fail the year before the test
>> - proclaim the poor performing students ill during the test period
>> - take many disciplinary actions for futile offenses until they 
>> 'voluntary' leave school before the test.
>> - ...
>>
>> At least the first four options are actually used in some form in the 
>> Netherlands to increase the rating of the school.
> 
>     I would say: Introduce competition between schools much like our 
> football leagues here in the UK. Give the pupils something to be proud of 
> and to work for - a challenge. Have league tables. Give them incentive/s. If 
> they are in a school that does *very* well, then that pupil has a better 
> option of getting a good job and earning more money when they leave. If the 
> school doesn't do well, then the pupils are on the scrap-heap and not the 
> teachers.
> 
>    I wish that was in place when I was young.
> 
It might seem a good idea, but the problem is that humans are too 
intelligent. If you are introducing a competition or grading or whatever 
based on a numerical score, teachers and schools are going to optimize 
that number. Most of the ratings that I have seen have some perverse way 
of increasing the score in a way that works totally against the intended 
objective. Base a score on the performance of pupils and schools will 
try to get rid of less performing students as soon as possible. It'll 
result in a system where the weaker pupils get less and less education. 
Another example is that the government here put a fine on too much delay 
for trains. Guess what happened. They changed the timetables to include 
waiting time at big stations, connecting trains don't wait for a 
slightly delayed train and they take trains out of the schedule as soon 
as the delay gets too big (the rule states that only running trains 
count). Result: more trains on time according to schedule and 
significant more delays for the passengers. Moral: never ever assign 
numerical scores to performance. No really, don't.

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Jim Charter wrote:
> 
>> I lasted just four days tutoring in the "No child left behind" effort.
>>
>> Personally, I've never looked back.
> 
> Hmmm. 'No child left behind' My wife was going on about all of the 
> paperwork she was required to file due to this act. I jokingly called it 
> the 'No Piece of Paper Left Behind' act.
> 
> She was telling me yesterday, that by some year (I think 4 years from 
> now, 2012) all students must pass standardized testing, or teachers 
> could lose their jobs. I replied by stating that it was asinine to think 
> that the teacher's performance should be judged by the student's 
> performance on a test. There are MANY more factors that go into the 
> performance of a child in addition to the teacher. You can't help those 
> who are not willing to be helped. Parents who refuse to be involved in 
> their child's education and well being are far more detrimental to that 
> child's ability to learn than a teacher who gave her best effort in the 
> classroom.

We went through the standardized testing during my last week on the job. 
  This is the Florida state test, and it is used not only to judge the 
performance of the school, but also to place the children during the 
following school year.

I do agree with placing the children according to their performance on 
the test, since there is really no better way of evaluating their level 
of learning, and it gives them a good incentive to do well on the test 
(otherwise they risk getting the stigma of placement in the remedial 
classes).  I do not agree with rating teachers and schools based on the 
results of these tests.

The only other thing to use the tests for is to identify the students 
who are performing above their demographic peers, and then identify the 
methods that are used by their teachers, and institute these methods in 
every applicable circumstance.

Our school does exceptionally well on these tests, and the 
administrators probably imagine that it's because of something they do. 
  What are far more likely causes are two factors that are unique to our 
school vs. the other public schools in the area.  Our school is a 
charter school, publicly funded, but operated under somewhat different 
rules.

Factor number one is the requirement that every student be the child of 
at least one person working for the private company that sponsored the 
establishment of the charter school, or for a company that is linked to 
this sponsoring company.  This means, among other things, that at least 
one person in the household works for a living.  This reduces an 
enormous range of social pathologies.

Second, attendance here is regarded as a privilege, not a right, and 
students can be sent packing for things that would be ignored in the 
other schools.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> 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.)

This scares me, and opens up the system for all kinds of abuse.

Any time you deal in absolutes ("100%", "Not a single mistake", always / 
never etc) you should probably adjust your thinking.

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 07:23:44 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> 
>> I dunno, I think the teachers' unions would have a problem with that
>> here...
>> 
>> 
> They're free to do that here (no union) But, yes. Good coaches get cushy
> jobs, and get to teach such things as math and science.
> 
> Ever had a biology class taught by a football coach? >shudder<

I never took biology, but I know what you mean.....Yeah, sometimes the 
priorities of schools get really messed up.  My university was ranked at 
the bottom of the sports rankings for pretty much every sport; I couldn't 
understand why they did sports scholarships (it is, after all, an 
aeronautical university with programs like aeronautical engineering, 
computer science, and engineering physics) but not generally for things 
like, oh, I don't know, running the computer lab network with 0 
downtime....

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:52:07 -0700, Chambers wrote:

> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> 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.)
> 
> This scares me, and opens up the system for all kinds of abuse.
> 
> Any time you deal in absolutes ("100%", "Not a single mistake", always /
> never etc) you should probably adjust your thinking.

It's essentially a "zero tolerance" implementation on the academic side.  
Maybe if ZT policies get applied to school administration as well, we'll 
see some common sense return to the schools.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:16 -0400, John VanSickle wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Wow.  How old are the students?
> 
> These are ninth grade.  The youngest turned 14 this past December (he
> skipped a grade in elementary school), and the oldest turned 17 this
> month (flunked at least one grade).

You'd think by that age they'd have figured out how to act appropriately 
in school....

There I go again, applying common sense. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:46:20 -0300, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> Mike Raiford escribió:
>> Don't know what grades you taught, but teaching is one of those jobs
>> that's very hard, and is getting more and more difficult every day. My
>> wife is a teacher, and I admire her for what she does. I don't have the
>> patience to be a school teacher, and I have very little tolerance for
>> bad behavior and general disrespect, I suspect I would definitely not
>> be suited for the job.
> 
> I know somebody who is teaching English as a second language in South
> Korea. To 5-year-old kids. How much patience does *that* need...

My brother teaches ESL to kids (and adults) of all ages in Osaka - he 
says there are days, and then there are *days*.

Jim

Post a reply to this message