To the parents in "good schools"

[Anonymous]

I get this and it rings true to me.

Ihave 4 kids. 2 of them would be fine in any environment. Of the other two, one is highly gifted and one is bright but has a learning disability. Both of them have had better experiences and gotten more tailored help/extension work in middle-low tier diverse schools rather than the highest performing ones. Our experience is that the former are more accustomed to dealing with a wide variety of abilities and learning styles at both ends of the spectrum (and at the high end, even if they haven't seen it before, they are used to individualizing more and more willing to try things). Top performing schools can fall into a trap of thinking they have everything wired and they don't have to look beyond that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get this and it rings true to me.

Ihave 4 kids. 2 of them would be fine in any environment. Of the other two, one is highly gifted and one is bright but has a learning disability. Both of them have had better experiences and gotten more tailored help/extension work in middle-low tier diverse schools rather than the highest performing ones. Our experience is that the former are more accustomed to dealing with a wide variety of abilities and learning styles at both ends of the spectrum (and at the high end, even if they haven't seen it before, they are used to individualizing more and more willing to try things). Top performing schools can fall into a trap of thinking they have everything wired and they don't have to look beyond that.

Our experience is the opposite. At the lower-tier schools, the primary focus is on the "at risk" kids, the top kids can go the IB route, and everyone in the middle gets ignored and taken for granted. At the higher-tier schools, the middle is high-performing and appropriately challenged, and the top kids have even more opportunities to excel. The biggest risk at the top-tier schools is that the low performers might be ignored, because they can flounder without placing the school at risk of losing accreditation, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a moment now in between waiting for kids at different sports, but I wanted to write a post to maybe spur a real discussion.

I taught in FCPS for over 10 years. The first ten I worked in a high poverty, high ESOL school. It was an amazing experience. I learned so much as a teacher. I was constantly challenged and I was constantly pushed to come up with ways to reach our kids. I still remember the day when a kid I taught who spoke no English told me she got into TJ. This is why I love teaching. The school had a high turnover because it was a tough place to teach. They had a lot of people who used it to get into the system and then ran to schools where student performance wasn't an issue.

Well, life happened. I normally worked 12 hour days during the school year and usually spent Sunday afternoons planning for Monday. I had a baby. And another one. And I don't live near our school, so I decided to transfer to a new school closer to where we live. It's one of those affluent schools the SOL pass rates are so high no one even blinks an eye.

And the past few years has been easy. The kids are great (because I love kids and these kids are awesome too). The parents are responsive in a way that blows my mind. I send a note for supplies and am given tons. It's night and day. And I really love the community. These are good people.

But they deserve better. And by that I mean we coast. I will give an example. I had a teacher in my grade mention that her kids were not getting a math issue. I offered ten different ways to teach it beyond the default pacing guide and she shrugged and said she's sending home some worksheets and a note. The parents will either handle it or get the kids tutoring.

It hit me that these people who are spending so much money to live around here, who care so deeply, and who tout our school as amazing. It's not us. It's them. I don't know what to do that. Anyway, sorry for the vent, but if anyone feels this way, it might make me feel less bonkers.

OP, what grade/subject do you teach?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I partly agree with this. I have a kid at TJ, and the math department teachers generally suck. So we use tutoring. To get Bs. And one semester, a C+. And yet, my kid is learning something. Math is not the subject he is at TJ for. And by TJ standards he’s a weak math student. And yet, at the end of sophomore year, got an 800 on the SAT math II, and a 780 (1 missed question) on the regular SAT math. Perfect PSAT Math sophomore year.

Since the math teacher don’t get a lot of credit on this, I have to think some combo of great peer group and very high expectations/ hard work/ the requirement from homework through the test to apply math in novel situations.

Even in the best school some teachers are duds (but not all: my kid has had uniformly excellent English and history, and excellent bio and physics, but not Chem). And parent participation plays s huge role. But so does peer group, and the expectations of teachers, peers, parents and the school.

Please elaborate on this. How do the math teachers suck?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's be honest. Our values reflect our class and we want our kids around them. Honestly, I don't care about your skills as a teacher. I care if my kids are learning what they need to be successful. And if they aren't of course I am going to spend my money to support them. Teachers aren't the end all, OP. I think OP thinks she's way more important than she is.[/quote]


OP does sound rather insufferable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the overall environment at the top pyramid is simply better, especially the work ethic of the students and the range of extra-curricular activities.

OP, I feel for you. I was you. I spent 10 years in a high poverty school, had kids, went to a high performing school because I, too, had kids and needed my life back. Sweetie and I say this nicely, but you just need to coast and enjoy your own kids. You can go back when they are older. I did. I love my high poverty, high ESOL elementary school. I am ready to be more of a teacher and less of a conduit.

Everything you said is true. But these parents don't care. Seriously. I mean, some of them might, but the quote above and high passing SOL test scores really is the entire key to parents calling a school "good." They don't care how this occurs. They'll supplement, so let them. Send home worksheets. Hell, I remember the day when my kids weren't getting a math concept. I tried to teach it and then basically said to the parents you all need to make sure your kids know this concept. It's an important standard, we test it and if their kids can't do it, it might impact their SOL performance. I did this with the blessing and support of my admin. And you know what? These parents got tutors, supplemented and everyone passed. I didn't have to do the heavy lifting because no one expects it. They want the cohort of kids. They want to avoid ESOL or high poverty issues. They want peers with college educated parents where college is an expectation. They want the extras raised by a well-funded PTA.

But they don't care, OP. Hope tomorrow is better, dear.

Clearly this is what parents prefer. But does research support the notion that it's truly better? Are the kids and the extracurriculars really more important than the teaching? Maybe at the high school level but in elementary school? Control for SES and what's the outcome?

I think what OP sees is that in high performing schools, teachers are held to less high standards than struggling Title I schools. As a result, it's easier for a lazy (or less motivated) teacher to hide out in a high performing school than a struggling one. OP seems frustrated because she sees these teachers not doing their best, but parents don't care because the peer group, test scores, extra activities, demographics, etc. are the only thing that matters to them. But to OP, it seems like these kids' are being shortchanged.

The thread basically seems to confirm that the parents don't care about skilled teaching so much as about other things. Since the parents don't care, the state and county seem to only care about test scores, and there's nothing else holding them accountable, it creates this situation. There's no incentive to go-above and beyond because no one cares. Sure, some teachers do because they are committed professionals, but the environment is ripe for someone to take advantage of the lack of incentive to do more.

Actually, I don't see how it would be any easier for a teacher to hide out. Regardless of where you teach, teachers are constantly having their test scores (not just end of the year, but unit tests) compared to each other. If your students consistently score lower than your co-workers, administration knows and that is a problem for you. So yes, while a teacher at a higher SES school who does little might have test scores higher than a teacher at a lower SES school who works her butt off, the former teacher would still have students who score lower than the students of other teachers at her school, and that would be a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the overall environment at the top pyramid is simply better, especially the work ethic of the students and the range of extra-curricular activities.

OP, I feel for you. I was you. I spent 10 years in a high poverty school, had kids, went to a high performing school because I, too, had kids and needed my life back. Sweetie and I say this nicely, but you just need to coast and enjoy your own kids. You can go back when they are older. I did. I love my high poverty, high ESOL elementary school. I am ready to be more of a teacher and less of a conduit.

Everything you said is true. But these parents don't care. Seriously. I mean, some of them might, but the quote above and high passing SOL test scores really is the entire key to parents calling a school "good." They don't care how this occurs. They'll supplement, so let them. Send home worksheets. Hell, I remember the day when my kids weren't getting a math concept. I tried to teach it and then basically said to the parents you all need to make sure your kids know this concept. It's an important standard, we test it and if their kids can't do it, it might impact their SOL performance. I did this with the blessing and support of my admin. And you know what? These parents got tutors, supplemented and everyone passed. I didn't have to do the heavy lifting because no one expects it. They want the cohort of kids. They want to avoid ESOL or high poverty issues. They want peers with college educated parents where college is an expectation. They want the extras raised by a well-funded PTA.

But they don't care, OP. Hope tomorrow is better, dear.

Clearly this is what parents prefer. But does research support the notion that it's truly better? Are the kids and the extracurriculars really more important than the teaching? Maybe at the high school level but in elementary school? Control for SES and what's the outcome?

I think what OP sees is that in high performing schools, teachers are held to less high standards than struggling Title I schools. As a result, it's easier for a lazy (or less motivated) teacher to hide out in a high performing school than a struggling one. OP seems frustrated because she sees these teachers not doing their best, but parents don't care because the peer group, test scores, extra activities, demographics, etc. are the only thing that matters to them. But to OP, it seems like these kids' are being shortchanged.

The thread basically seems to confirm that the parents don't care about skilled teaching so much as about other things. Since the parents don't care, the state and county seem to only care about test scores, and there's nothing else holding them accountable, it creates this situation. There's no incentive to go-above and beyond because no one cares. Sure, some teachers do because they are committed professionals, but the environment is ripe for someone to take advantage of the lack of incentive to do more.

Actually, I don't see how it would be any easier for a teacher to hide out. Regardless of where you teach, teachers are constantly having their test scores (not just end of the year, but unit tests) compared to each other. If your students consistently score lower than your co-workers, administration knows and that is a problem for you. So yes, while a teacher at a higher SES school who does little might have test scores higher than a teacher at a lower SES school who works her butt off, the former teacher would still have students who score lower than the students of other teachers at her school, and that would be a problem.

It's easier to hide out in a wealthier school because student test scores are going to be in the range of good because the parents supplement, etc. I work in such a school and like OP left my title I school because the work demands are huge, the pay was exactly the same, and I had children. Schools like ours are much, much easier to teach in. My test scores are fine compared to my peers. Then again, two other women on my team are in the same sort of boat and are probably coasting too, fwiw.

My job is much more boring from a professional standpoint now, but I am taking advantage and coasting because I have small kids and can't give more as a teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the overall environment at the top pyramid is simply better, especially the work ethic of the students and the range of extra-curricular activities.

OP, I feel for you. I was you. I spent 10 years in a high poverty school, had kids, went to a high performing school because I, too, had kids and needed my life back. Sweetie and I say this nicely, but you just need to coast and enjoy your own kids. You can go back when they are older. I did. I love my high poverty, high ESOL elementary school. I am ready to be more of a teacher and less of a conduit.

Everything you said is true. But these parents don't care. Seriously. I mean, some of them might, but the quote above and high passing SOL test scores really is the entire key to parents calling a school "good." They don't care how this occurs. They'll supplement, so let them. Send home worksheets. Hell, I remember the day when my kids weren't getting a math concept. I tried to teach it and then basically said to the parents you all need to make sure your kids know this concept. It's an important standard, we test it and if their kids can't do it, it might impact their SOL performance. I did this with the blessing and support of my admin. And you know what? These parents got tutors, supplemented and everyone passed. I didn't have to do the heavy lifting because no one expects it. They want the cohort of kids. They want to avoid ESOL or high poverty issues. They want peers with college educated parents where college is an expectation. They want the extras raised by a well-funded PTA.

But they don't care, OP. Hope tomorrow is better, dear.

Clearly this is what parents prefer. But does research support the notion that it's truly better? Are the kids and the extracurriculars really more important than the teaching? Maybe at the high school level but in elementary school? Control for SES and what's the outcome?

I think what OP sees is that in high performing schools, teachers are held to less high standards than struggling Title I schools. As a result, it's easier for a lazy (or less motivated) teacher to hide out in a high performing school than a struggling one. OP seems frustrated because she sees these teachers not doing their best, but parents don't care because the peer group, test scores, extra activities, demographics, etc. are the only thing that matters to them. But to OP, it seems like these kids' are being shortchanged.

The thread basically seems to confirm that the parents don't care about skilled teaching so much as about other things. Since the parents don't care, the state and county seem to only care about test scores, and there's nothing else holding them accountable, it creates this situation. There's no incentive to go-above and beyond because no one cares. Sure, some teachers do because they are committed professionals, but the environment is ripe for someone to take advantage of the lack of incentive to do more.

Actually, I don't see how it would be any easier for a teacher to hide out. Regardless of where you teach, teachers are constantly having their test scores (not just end of the year, but unit tests) compared to each other. If your students consistently score lower than your co-workers, administration knows and that is a problem for you. So yes, while a teacher at a higher SES school who does little might have test scores higher than a teacher at a lower SES school who works her butt off, the former teacher would still have students who score lower than the students of other teachers at her school, and that would be a problem.

It's easier to hide out in a wealthier school because student test scores are going to be in the range of good because the parents supplement, etc. I work in such a school and like OP left my title I school because the work demands are huge, the pay was exactly the same, and I had children. Schools like ours are much, much easier to teach in. My test scores are fine compared to my peers. Then again, two other women on my team are in the same sort of boat and are probably coasting too, fwiw.

My job is much more boring from a professional standpoint now, but I am taking advantage and coasting because I have small kids and can't give more as a teacher.

Yes, but regardless of where you work, your test scores are going to be compared to your co-workers. When it comes down to it, that's all that really matters. At a title 1 school, your scores may be shitty, but if they're less shitty than your co-workers your doing well. At a good school, your scores may be good, but if your co-workers are better then that's a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the overall environment at the top pyramid is simply better, especially the work ethic of the students and the range of extra-curricular activities.

OP, I feel for you. I was you. I spent 10 years in a high poverty school, had kids, went to a high performing school because I, too, had kids and needed my life back. Sweetie and I say this nicely, but you just need to coast and enjoy your own kids. You can go back when they are older. I did. I love my high poverty, high ESOL elementary school. I am ready to be more of a teacher and less of a conduit.

Everything you said is true. But these parents don't care. Seriously. I mean, some of them might, but the quote above and high passing SOL test scores really is the entire key to parents calling a school "good." They don't care how this occurs. They'll supplement, so let them. Send home worksheets. Hell, I remember the day when my kids weren't getting a math concept. I tried to teach it and then basically said to the parents you all need to make sure your kids know this concept. It's an important standard, we test it and if their kids can't do it, it might impact their SOL performance. I did this with the blessing and support of my admin. And you know what? These parents got tutors, supplemented and everyone passed. I didn't have to do the heavy lifting because no one expects it. They want the cohort of kids. They want to avoid ESOL or high poverty issues. They want peers with college educated parents where college is an expectation. They want the extras raised by a well-funded PTA.

But they don't care, OP. Hope tomorrow is better, dear.

Clearly this is what parents prefer. But does research support the notion that it's truly better? Are the kids and the extracurriculars really more important than the teaching? Maybe at the high school level but in elementary school? Control for SES and what's the outcome?

I think what OP sees is that in high performing schools, teachers are held to less high standards than struggling Title I schools. As a result, it's easier for a lazy (or less motivated) teacher to hide out in a high performing school than a struggling one. OP seems frustrated because she sees these teachers not doing their best, but parents don't care because the peer group, test scores, extra activities, demographics, etc. are the only thing that matters to them. But to OP, it seems like these kids' are being shortchanged.

The thread basically seems to confirm that the parents don't care about skilled teaching so much as about other things. Since the parents don't care, the state and county seem to only care about test scores, and there's nothing else holding them accountable, it creates this situation. There's no incentive to go-above and beyond because no one cares. Sure, some teachers do because they are committed professionals, but the environment is ripe for someone to take advantage of the lack of incentive to do more.

Actually, I don't see how it would be any easier for a teacher to hide out. Regardless of where you teach, teachers are constantly having their test scores (not just end of the year, but unit tests) compared to each other. If your students consistently score lower than your co-workers, administration knows and that is a problem for you. So yes, while a teacher at a higher SES school who does little might have test scores higher than a teacher at a lower SES school who works her butt off, the former teacher would still have students who score lower than the students of other teachers at her school, and that would be a problem.

It's easier to hide out in a wealthier school because student test scores are going to be in the range of good because the parents supplement, etc. I work in such a school and like OP left my title I school because the work demands are huge, the pay was exactly the same, and I had children. Schools like ours are much, much easier to teach in. My test scores are fine compared to my peers. Then again, two other women on my team are in the same sort of boat and are probably coasting too, fwiw.

My job is much more boring from a professional standpoint now, but I am taking advantage and coasting because I have small kids and can't give more as a teacher.

As a parent at a wealthier school, I can say that we understand that our schools have teachers like you. As long as you’re doing your job and our kids are making good progress, along with their peers, we are happy. You may think you are “coasting,” but to us it will look like you have “hit your stride,” and we’re happy to have a good teacher, rather than one who is 110% invested one year, but gone the next, because she has burned out.

Of course, if you are visibly disinterested in your class and the kids are equally bored, that won’t go unnoticed or unreported, either.

[Anonymous]

It also goes noticed when teachers don't spend time with children helping them in any way. The main issue I've seen with teachers in wealthier schools is that there are kids who aren't bored but go off track on work or don't complete work because the teacher isn't really involved with the class.

[Anonymous]

I would think at a wealthier school, there would be more parents questioning the teacher and peppering him/her with emails. A crummy teacher would not go unnoticed for too long. In our Title 1, it is a huge undertaking to get parents to come for any events. Do you think they'll be emailing/volunteering/requesting conferences? I don't think many know what their kids' teachers are like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It also goes noticed when teachers don't spend time with children helping them in any way. The main issue I've seen with teachers in wealthier schools is that there are kids who aren't bored but go off track on work or don't complete work because the teacher isn't really involved with the class.

That would seem like a relatively small subset of students. If the kids go off track or don't complete work, it's likely to affect their grades, their test scores, or both, and the parents will notice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It also goes noticed when teachers don't spend time with children helping them in any way. The main issue I've seen with teachers in wealthier schools is that there are kids who aren't bored but go off track on work or don't complete work because the teacher isn't really involved with the class.

That would seem like a relatively small subset of students. If the kids go off track or don't complete work, it's likely to affect their grades, their test scores, or both, and the parents will notice.

Unfortunately that really doesn't happen because the SOL's are covering basic skills, not a lot of growth for these children. So yes, it's noticeable when kids don't pass SOL's, but grades can be inflated and are also not a very good measure of progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It also goes noticed when teachers don't spend time with children helping them in any way. The main issue I've seen with teachers in wealthier schools is that there are kids who aren't bored but go off track on work or don't complete work because the teacher isn't really involved with the class.

That would seem like a relatively small subset of students. If the kids go off track or don't complete work, it's likely to affect their grades, their test scores, or both, and the parents will notice.

Unfortunately that really doesn't happen because the SOL's are covering basic skills, not a lot of growth for these children. So yes, it's noticeable when kids don't pass SOL's, but grades can be inflated and are also not a very good measure of progress.

If it were all that simple, then the SOL pass rates at the poorer schools where the teachers are supposedly motivated to bust their butts so hard presumably would be higher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It also goes noticed when teachers don't spend time with children helping them in any way. The main issue I've seen with teachers in wealthier schools is that there are kids who aren't bored but go off track on work or don't complete work because the teacher isn't really involved with the class.

That would seem like a relatively small subset of students. If the kids go off track or don't complete work, it's likely to affect their grades, their test scores, or both, and the parents will notice.

Unfortunately that really doesn't happen because the SOL's are covering basic skills, not a lot of growth for these children. So yes, it's noticeable when kids don't pass SOL's, but grades can be inflated and are also not a very good measure of progress.

I guess you forgot that the SOLs used to be easy but they were made harder, in response to your complaints.