Will Michelle Rhee really fire a lot of DC teachers?

[Anonymous]

So what constitutes an effective teacher? DC now tests their 3rd-5th grades FIVE times a year (DCBAS & DCCAS), and K-3 take the DIBELS test 3 times a year - along with a handful of new math initiatives that also test students. Yes, data is important to inform teaching, but too much instructional time is lost, and teachers end up teaching to the test. Is that effective? It's ridiculous and so is Rhee's "plan".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I have had 2 children at one of the better DCPS elementary schools, and even there (though it's a great school) there were a couple of veteran teachers who were just awful, but who had seniority and were just phoning it in until they could retire. And I've seen written materials (letter, instuction sheets) from teachers that were mispelled with awful grammar. There are some teachers in the system who just aren't up to par. They may be nice people, they may have the best intentions, but they're not very good. And they should go. And the great ones (and I've been lucky to have met several) should be rewarded.

We have had the same experience in DCPS -- poor teachers, teachers phoning it in until retirement, teachers unwilling to try anything new. Nice, but not effective & should be fired IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have had the same experience in DCPS -- poor teachers, teachers phoning it in until retirement, teachers unwilling to try anything new. Nice, but not effective & should be fired IMO.

FWIW, you are going to find folks like this in well to do districts and rural areas, and non-union private schools as well. I'm not excusing it, but it's not unique, and not something that is the fault of a union.

[Anonymous]

You can find poor teachers anywhere, true; but in more effective school systems, the evaluation process works to remove such teachers before they get to far (or help them improve).

You can certainly evaluate teachers for being skillful at their job without just measuring high test scores. Minimal competency can be eveluated by an effective principal, and shoudl involve things like how well the teacher communicates with parents and communicates expectations to students; how well the teacher organizes and manages the classroom and effectively handles discipline; how well the teacher assesses the students abilities, and tailors the curriculum to their current level of skill.

If a school district requires a 6th grade teacher to teach a 6th grade reading curriculum to children who are reading at a 3rd grade level, then there's not really that much chance that the teacher will be effective, though, unless she disobeys the district's requirement. In a properly managed school district, teachers would be required to use a differentiated curricullum to meet students where they are, and they'd have incentives for helping students progress as fast as possible to catch up to where they should be. Instead of measuring just high test scores, schools could look at test improvement, among many other measures, to decide which teachers are most effective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can find poor teachers anywhere, true; but in more effective school systems, the evaluation process works to remove such teachers before they get to far (or help them improve).

You can certainly evaluate teachers for being skillful at their job without just measuring high test scores. Minimal competency can be eveluated by an effective principal, and shoudl involve things like how well the teacher communicates with parents and communicates expectations to students; how well the teacher organizes and manages the classroom and effectively handles discipline; how well the teacher assesses the students abilities, and tailors the curriculum to their current level of skill.

If a school district requires a 6th grade teacher to teach a 6th grade reading curriculum to children who are reading at a 3rd grade level, then there's not really that much chance that the teacher will be effective, though, unless she disobeys the district's requirement. In a properly managed school district, teachers would be required to use a differentiated curricullum to meet students where they are, and they'd have incentives for helping students progress as fast as possible to catch up to where they should be. Instead of measuring just high test scores, schools could look at test improvement, among many other measures, to decide which teachers are most effective.

interesting comments, PP, with which I certainly agree
Are you an educator?

In larger districts there are indeed structured evaluation procedures in place. However, whether they are followed by the administrative team is another issue. I've known teachers who have had to write up their own observations b/c the administrator in charge was overloaded. sad but true and is often the case in very large schools with large departments . . . So if a department has 20 teachers, and 5 of them are up for evaluation, that means several observations and write ups are in order. Keep in mind that assistant principals at the high school level are in charge of several departments, too. So s/he may have 5 in English, 3 in math, and 4 in science, depending upon where teachers are in their evaluation cycle.

In order to remove teachers from their positions, documentation is required - by the AP, the resource teacher (aka - department head), and perhaps others, such as consulting teachers. A teacher can grieve this, but it's ultimately up to the principal to move the process forward. As a result, good teachers are often overlooked b/c much energy is placed upon low performing teachers - another reason why many leave the profession.

So it's all very complex - perhaps one of the most complex professions around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what constitutes an effective teacher? DC now tests their 3rd-5th grades FIVE times a year (DCBAS & DCCAS), and K-3 take the DIBELS test 3 times a year - along with a handful of new math initiatives that also test students. Yes, data is important to inform teaching, but too much instructional time is lost, and teachers end up teaching to the test. Is that effective? It's ridiculous and so is Rhee's "plan".

Actually, this kind of testing was critical to trying to get appropriate teaching for our DC. It was also critical in uncovering the fact that a child of a friend of mine was one year behind in reading & thus getting that child appropriate help. Without this kind of testing, parents (and, yes, teachers as well) are clueless about where a child really is skills-wise. Under a new principal (and at the order of Rhee), these testing scores had to be shared with parents at the beginning of the year and a individual educational plan developed for each child. In the first year, our child's plan was pretty lame considering the test scores, but, frankly, just having the info on the table was a HUGE help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

interesting comments, PP, with which I certainly agree
Are you an educator?

Yes -- taught many years in Fairfax County. I went through the evaluation system a few times. It was a bit of a pain, a bit arbitrary -- but I felt it was generally fair, and effective.

[Anonymous]

I come from a family of public school teachers. What teachers don't trust is that their performance will be evaluated fairly. There are good principals and bad ones, and I've seen bad ones destroy schools by alienating all of the decent teachers and pursuing personal vendettas. It's difficult to appeal a principal's evaluation because no one higher ranking is at the school, observing what goes on. A lot of people don't want to trust their salaries/jobs to their principal.

In addition, teachers don't want to be judged on the basis of their students' test scores, when the empirical evidence suggests that a lot of that is influenced by non-school related factors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I come from a family of public school teachers. What teachers don't trust is that their performance will be evaluated fairly. There are good principals and bad ones, and I've seen bad ones destroy schools by alienating all of the decent teachers and pursuing personal vendettas. It's difficult to appeal a principal's evaluation because no one higher ranking is at the school, observing what goes on. A lot of people don't want to trust their salaries/jobs to their principal.

In addition, teachers don't want to be judged on the basis of their students' test scores, when the empirical evidence suggests that a lot of that is influenced by non-school related factors

I think MOST people don't want to trust their salaries to the evaluation of their bosses, if their bosses are allowed to be arbitrary, or are bad, vindictive bosses.

I was a teacher for 10 years before taking some time off to care for my own children. I taught children who did not come from homes where English was spoken and whose families had very low income; shildren who moved around from school to school frequently, and I would not have had any problem being evaluated on their test score improvement each year. They always made significant improvement when they were in my class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think MOST people don't want to trust their salaries to the evaluation of their bosses, if their bosses are allowed to be arbitrary, or are bad, vindictive bosses.

I was a teacher for 10 years before taking some time off to care for my own children. I taught children who did not come from homes where English was spoken and whose families had very low income; shildren who moved around from school to school frequently, and I would not have had any problem being evaluated on their test score improvement each year. They always made significant improvement when they were in my class.

See, this I think is the real issue. I don't get the sense that it's so much the "what" as opposed to the "how," KWIM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think MOST people don't want to trust their salaries to the evaluation of their bosses, if their bosses are allowed to be arbitrary, or are bad, vindictive bosses.

I was a teacher for 10 years before taking some time off to care for my own children. I taught children who did not come from homes where English was spoken and whose families had very low income; shildren who moved around from school to school frequently, and I would not have had any problem being evaluated on their test score improvement each year. They always made significant improvement when they were in my class.

See, this I think is the real issue. I don't get the sense that it's so much the "what" as opposed to the "how," KWIM?

No, I don't know what you mean! Care to elaborate?

[Anonymous]

I mean I don't think folks are opposed to being evaluated, as long as it's fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean I don't think folks are opposed to being evaluated, as long as it's fair.

Oh, yeah, sure! That's my point, too -- who would want to be evaluated, if it weren't fair? That's not just a teacher thing, is all I'm saying.