Does your district make you work in collaborative teams?

[Anonymous]

Where for a given class, you have to follow the same exact sequence and pacing and use functionally the same tests as other teachers teaching the same thing?

I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons--it's adding significant stress to my work week and providing functionally zero benefit.

My experience so far with CTs in general is that their biggest outcome is taking away planning time and adding constraints, which we would as well without. Wondering if they're common everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where for a given class, you have to follow the same exact sequence and pacing and use functionally the same tests as other teachers teaching the same thing?

I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons--it's adding significant stress to my work week and providing functionally zero benefit.

My experience so far with CTs in general is that their biggest outcome is taking away planning time and adding constraints, which we would as well without. Wondering if they're common everywhere.

Yes. Been like that for a long time.

[Anonymous]

Yes. So stifling.

[Anonymous]

Yes. When my district switched to this method about ten years ago, I left the classroom for a specialist position. I did not see any proof that standardizing my teaching was making me a better teacher or helping my students learn more.

Not all schools are like this, even within the same county, so if you want more independence, see what you can find from friends and friends-of-friends at other schools. If you want to actually do the planning while you are stuck in that situation, press admin to carve out the collaborative planning time. If they want you to be on the same page, then the time should be provided and everyone should be required to attend. Otherwise, start prefacing comments at data meetings with "since we didn't have the opportunity to meet and plan this week..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes. When my district switched to this method about ten years ago, I left the classroom for a specialist position. I did not see any proof that standardizing my teaching was making me a better teacher or helping my students learn more.

Not all schools are like this, even within the same county, so if you want more independence, see what you can find from friends and friends-of-friends at other schools. If you want to actually do the planning while you are stuck in that situation, press admin to carve out the collaborative planning time. If they want you to be on the same page, then the time should be provided and everyone should be required to attend. Otherwise, start prefacing comments at data meetings with "since we didn't have the opportunity to meet and plan this week..."

I'm curious as to what you mean by that? What would they carve it out of if it's not planning time?

[Anonymous]

I'm curious as to what you mean by that? What would they carve it out of if it's not planning time?

The OP said, "I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons" so I--perhaps erroneously--inferred that there was not built-in planning time provided for her to collaborate with the colleague. I have worked in schools where the collaborative planning was expected to be done after school, since our schedules were not blocked out to consistently provide team members with the same planning time (we changed that, which is why I suggested it to OP if it is not currently provided).

[Anonymous]

NP and I read it differently. Common planning for clts are a time suck and often a complete waste of time. FCCPS is doing this too and depending on who you work with, it takes up a lot of planning time with meetings. A lot of this time goes to revising and writing MYP and IB planners. These are not helpful for teachers fo do what actually need to do, have time to plan our lessons and grade. There is a huge disconnect between those mandating these meetings for teams and those who actually work with students in the classroom.

[Anonymous]

In good schools it is organic or additional time is allotted, and the teachers want to be better, and help others be better. Like any performing organization.

“Other” schools, where people (teachers) don’t care and dominated by unions, it is forced and unproductive. Furthermore why would you want or need to be better? If you care about your job and mission, you will try. Which is to say many don’t (including teachers).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where for a given class, you have to follow the same exact sequence and pacing and use functionally the same tests as other teachers teaching the same thing?

I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons--it's adding significant stress to my work week and providing functionally zero benefit.

My experience so far with CTs in general is that their biggest outcome is taking away planning time and adding constraints, which we would as well without. Wondering if they're common everywhere.

They are common in pwcs and I hate it. I don’t see it going away anytime soon though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where for a given class, you have to follow the same exact sequence and pacing and use functionally the same tests as other teachers teaching the same thing?

I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons--it's adding significant stress to my work week and providing functionally zero benefit.

My experience so far with CTs in general is that their biggest outcome is taking away planning time and adding constraints, which we would as well without. Wondering if they're common everywhere.

They are common in pwcs and I hate it. I don’t see it going away anytime soon though.

They are common and exist so the middle management of the school (coaches, specialists etc) can have a job to do. Half the time they have no idea what your actual grade level needs are, and try to impose some weird structure upon you as a teacher so they can ‘report to the county.” I have little respect for ours and the model in general. They are a waste of money when I would rather have color printing and ink.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where for a given class, you have to follow the same exact sequence and pacing and use functionally the same tests as other teachers teaching the same thing?

I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons--it's adding significant stress to my work week and providing functionally zero benefit.

My experience so far with CTs in general is that their biggest outcome is taking away planning time and adding constraints, which we would as well without. Wondering if they're common everywhere.

They are common in pwcs and I hate it. I don’t see it going away anytime soon though.

They are common and exist so the middle management of the school (coaches, specialists etc) can have a job to do. Half the time they have no idea what your actual grade level needs are, and try to impose some weird structure upon you as a teacher so they can ‘report to the county.” I have little respect for ours and the model in general. They are a waste of money when I would rather have color printing and ink.

LOL, right!?! Our coaches are a joke. The district would be much better off taking that $200,000 and putting it into some other type of services. When the coaches don't even understand the standards then you know you are in trouble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where for a given class, you have to follow the same exact sequence and pacing and use functionally the same tests as other teachers teaching the same thing?

I teach two preps and am having a hard time coordinating with the other teacher for a whole host of reasons--it's adding significant stress to my work week and providing functionally zero benefit.

My experience so far with CTs in general is that their biggest outcome is taking away planning time and adding constraints, which we would as well without. Wondering if they're common everywhere.

They are common in pwcs and I hate it. I don’t see it going away anytime soon though.

They are common and exist so the middle management of the school (coaches, specialists etc) can have a job to do. Half the time they have no idea what your actual grade level needs are, and try to impose some weird structure upon you as a teacher so they can ‘report to the county.” I have little respect for ours and the model in general. They are a waste of money when I would rather have color printing and ink.

I find this true our reading specialists. They do work with intervention groups which is great but they also relentlessly push "policy" from the ELA office with absolutely no understanding how a classroom works (well the reading specialist has an idea, but the ELA office is genuinely clueless on how a classroom works outside of their "vacuum" and the specialist has no choice but to "toe the line.")

We in ES were given a new vocabulary, grammar and spelling program this year with zero training except for a 20 crash course and the directive to "do it." The program is well meaning but it's execution from the publisher is completely inappropriate for the classroom, it had a ton of resources that require more printing, more sorting, more cutting, and as teachers have figured out, a modification by THEM to make it work in the classroom.

ELA office will probably then say we did it wrong.