Innersting move on tenure by Colorado

[SanJoaquinSooner]

But they take a good idea - doing away with tenure for teachers - and F**K it up. Tieing it to improvement in test scores for three straight years to get tenure and losing tenure if your students show a decline for two straight years is a poor way to do this. There are so many holes in measurement of achievement in education.

Look, the boss (the principal) should make the decision whether to retain or fire a teacher based on a number of factors, not all focused on test prep. Test results should be one factor. And if the principal does a poor job in her decision making who to retain and fire, then fire her a$$, too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100612/ap_on_re_us/us_grading_teachers

[badger]

anyone who has teaching experience knows how much classes vary from year to year. one year, you get kiddos with parents that read to their kids every night, the next year you get kiddos that play M-rated video games every night and then bring their M-rated mouth to school the next morning.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

anyone who has teaching experience knows how much classes vary from year to year. one year, you get kiddos with parents that read to their kids every night, the next year you get kiddos that play M-rated video games every night and then bring their M-rated mouth to school the next morning.

Exactly. There are numerous problems with basing tenure just on test scores. Suppose a teacher has an honors section that has enrollment based on high test scores. That teacher may be at a disadvantage in "improvement" on test scores due to a regression toward the mean problem. Likewise those teachers who are assigned "far below basic" students may have a "regression toward the mean" advantage.

[yermom]

test scores really mean nothing

i killed those tests, but i was an awful student :D

something surely needs to be done, but i'm not sure how to really measure things. exceptionally good and bad students should probably be removed from the statistics, obviously though

any real guidance on that stuff is going to create more overhead and just spend more money. someone really needs to observe a class and look at numbers from there, maybe

[Leroy Lizard]

But they take a good idea - doing away with tenure for teachers - and F**K it up. Tieing it to improvement in test scores for three straight years to get tenure and losing tenure if your students show a decline for two straight years is a poor way to do this. There are so many holes in measurement of achievement in education.

Look, the boss (the principal) should make the decision whether to retain or fire a teacher based on a number of factors, not all focused on test prep. Test results should be one factor. And if the principal does a poor job in her decision making who to retain and fire, then fire her a$$, too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100612/ap_on_re_us/us_grading_teachers

Colorado is trying to curry favors from the Obama administration to receive federal money. This is the danger of having one man (Arne Duncan) with too much discretionary spending.

I am not a fan of unions. But I'll side with the union on this one: Ths is a HORRIBLE idea. But Arne Duncan is using federal money to neuter unions.

To a certain extent, unions can blame themselves. In an attempt to look powerful, they have alienated the public, therefore allowing a union basher like Duncan to come in to power.

BTW, the principal hasn't been the boss for a very long time. The superintendent is theoretically the boss, but he answers to the board. And the board historically hasn't wanted to upset the union because board members are popularly elected.

But....

now boards are taking on the unions because doing so is far more palatable. "Yeah, the district is in court defending their firing of that teacher who tried to rape a student, but I'm voting for ole Jim Bob anyway. After all, anybody that pisses off the union can't be a bad guy."

[Leroy Lizard]

test scores really mean nothing

i killed those tests, but i was an awful student :D

something surely needs to be done, but i'm not sure how to really measure things. exceptionally good and bad students should probably be removed from the statistics, obviously though

any real guidance on that stuff is going to create more overhead and just spend more money. someone really needs to observe a class and look at numbers from there, maybe

I have an idea: Why not measure what the teacher does, not the student?

[yermom]

if they can't connect with or motivate students, maybe they shouldn't be teachers

[Leroy Lizard]

if they can't connect with or motivate students, maybe they shouldn't be teachers

And there are things that teachers do to connect with students.

I go to every faculty development training I can find. Sometimes I pay my own way. I use those things that I learned (if I think they look promising).

So let's look for those things, rather than whether the students performed well on a state test.

Don't get me wrong: I think state tests are useful in a general way. (A school where the vast majority of students flunk is probably in need of some help.) But evaluating individual teachers? Those tests were not designed for that purpose.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

BTW, the principal hasn't been the boss for a very long time. The superintendent is theoretically the boss, but he answers to the board. And the board historically hasn't wanted to upset the union because board members are popularly elected.


The principal should be the boss with respect to evaluating faculty. The superintendent often doesn't know the individual teachers and never visits their classes. And the sup should ordinarily accept the recs of the principal.

It may depend on the state, but I believe in many states, the principal's recommendation on whether a teacher is retained following the probationary period, and granted tenure, usually prevails.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

To a certain extent, unions can blame themselves.

I agree.

[Leroy Lizard]

The principal should be the boss with respect to evaluating faculty. The superintendent often doesn't know the individual teachers and never visits their classes. And the sup should ordinarily accept the recs of the principal.

In theory, yes. Principals do evaluate teachers. (Superintendents show up the classrooms quite regularly, but they're spread thin over multiple schools.) Principals will tell you that their recommendations are largely ignored. If the school must fire someone (to lower costs), then the principal's wishes are usually granted as long as the teacher is untenured (that is, a member of the scumbucket caste).