The Time magazine article of Dec 8, 2008 on Michelle Rhee, Chancellor of DC public schools destroys the credibility of the Teacher's Unions ability to protect their members.
This article, focusing on the actions of the new DC schools chancellor (Rhee), points out the fact that Rhee has been able to fire nearly 300 teachers in the past year. The article gives no data on any personnel reviews, and no apparent reasons given other than nebulous notions of weak or poor performance. In fact, the indication from the article is that Rhee herself decides who stays and who goes. (Just my impression from the article.)
Rhee's ideas stem from her personal crusade to put 'better' teachers in classrooms across the country. This coming from a deep seated idea that 'strong' teachers can better meet the needs of the students in their care. While this idea is not new, it has never actually proven to be a significant factor in education quality.
The problem for the teachers unions is that she is making it happen, and the unions are apparently impotent to stop the process.
I am of several minds about this. On one hand, I really like seeing the unions squeal like stuck pigs because someone finally has the...uhm...guts...yeah, guts...to challenge them on this issue in their seat of power. Seeing this happen in DC is just...delicious.
On the other hand, Rhee is acting on a personal fixed idea that is not going to produce any results and is going to cause far more chaos and turmoil that will have real (negative) impact upon the school system in the long run. When the results are not forthcoming, Ms. Rhee is going to be acquainted with the administrative version of a lynching. (Read the article and it leaves the impression that Ms. Rhee pisses off friends and foes alike.) Don't get me wrong, there may be some positive results for a year or perhaps two, with small improvements, but it won't last. It won't last because teachers are not the problem with education quality. (But that is a subject for another post.)
Mass firings without clear reasoning creates a state of fear, and fear is not a good motivator in the long run. Though Ms Rhee wants to implement incentives for high performance, it is not occurring. There is no support structure and/or policy innovation to guide the remaining staff on how to be 'strong' teachers, thus her policies leave behind a wake of confusion and turmoil for all remaining teachers. It is that confusion which will paralyze the teachers, and eventually the entire system. What will teachers do throughout the year to make certain their students' test scores improve (so they will retain their jobs)? Can we evermore be certain of the truth in any report coming from an organization where the average worker could lose his/her job on a whim?
When you cannot define what a good and strong teacher is, or cannot train the teachers to acquire the skills/abilities which would make a 'strong' teacher, set the organization up to fail by demanding it happen. Ms. Rhee thinks she knows, but she is mistaken. That mistake will cost the DC schools and students dearly.
Perhaps before someone granted her unlimited power over the DC schools they should have checked the track record of all the teachers she promoted and got hired through her organization the New Teacher Project. Of course, no one thought of that...
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Are Teachers being Demonized?
AFT president Randi Weingarten in a recent speech lamented the notion that Teachers are being ‘demonized’ and blamed for the poor performance of the public schools. In checking the source of these statements referred to by Bob Hebert in a recent NY Times op ed, I found that Ms. Weingarten’s words could be found in political speeches aimed at demonizing republican candidate for president, John McCain. It is obvious that Mr. Hebert wrote his piece to further promote this notion of teachers under some social stigma.
The trouble is that the notion is false, though perhaps not undeserving.
Are teachers to blame for anything regarding the state of public education? The current reality is a great dichotomy: public education is nearly reviled in every state of the nation, yet the actual education providers, teachers, are still voted raises (by the public) continually, even in the worst school districts in the nation. At a time when public opinion of the school system is terrible, the public shows remarkable support for the teachers, and are easily swayed to support them despite all evidence which shows them undeserving.
So where is this idea of teachers being demonized coming from? Why, from the PR department of the teacher’s union. Public support for teachers is historically strong, and the unions are attempting to play off that support by creating a false notion that teachers are under attack. (Absurd, but true.)
The truth is that teachers are not being blamed for the poor quality of education in the schools, even though they are the primary givers of education; Ms. Weingarten and Mr. Hebert’s assertions are pure politics. Over the years all evidence of poor performance and substandard delivery has been excused. Teachers have never in the past, nor in the present, been held accountable for the all too real failure of the public schools.
From the above you may think that I am one who thinks teachers are to blame for the state of public education. You would be wrong.
What I believe is that the teachers are put into a terrible situation by the management of the schools and school districts which cause them to violate their training on a daily basis. It is the constant pressure from school management to forgo real teaching standards which place the teachers in a position to choose between their careers and the well being of their students.
There is no question the public schools do not meet the needs of today’s society. But this is less the result of teacher competence than the fact that the organization and operation of the schools prevents real education from occurring.
Sadly, the teachers are caught in the middle, with no real power to affect any change.
The trouble is that the notion is false, though perhaps not undeserving.
Are teachers to blame for anything regarding the state of public education? The current reality is a great dichotomy: public education is nearly reviled in every state of the nation, yet the actual education providers, teachers, are still voted raises (by the public) continually, even in the worst school districts in the nation. At a time when public opinion of the school system is terrible, the public shows remarkable support for the teachers, and are easily swayed to support them despite all evidence which shows them undeserving.
So where is this idea of teachers being demonized coming from? Why, from the PR department of the teacher’s union. Public support for teachers is historically strong, and the unions are attempting to play off that support by creating a false notion that teachers are under attack. (Absurd, but true.)
The truth is that teachers are not being blamed for the poor quality of education in the schools, even though they are the primary givers of education; Ms. Weingarten and Mr. Hebert’s assertions are pure politics. Over the years all evidence of poor performance and substandard delivery has been excused. Teachers have never in the past, nor in the present, been held accountable for the all too real failure of the public schools.
From the above you may think that I am one who thinks teachers are to blame for the state of public education. You would be wrong.
What I believe is that the teachers are put into a terrible situation by the management of the schools and school districts which cause them to violate their training on a daily basis. It is the constant pressure from school management to forgo real teaching standards which place the teachers in a position to choose between their careers and the well being of their students.
There is no question the public schools do not meet the needs of today’s society. But this is less the result of teacher competence than the fact that the organization and operation of the schools prevents real education from occurring.
Sadly, the teachers are caught in the middle, with no real power to affect any change.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Why Are more Schools facing NCLB Sanctions?
More Schools Facing Sanctions Under NCLB Data on adequate yearly progress show that 1 in 5 public schools are in some stage of penalties under the federal law. By David J. Hoff
Almost 30,000 schools in the United States failed to make adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act in the 2007-08 school year. For states with comparable data for the 2006-07 school year, the number of such schools increased by 28 percent.
Half those schools missed their achievement goals for two or more years, putting almost one in five of the nation’s public schools in some stage of a federally mandated process designed to improve student achievement. The number facing sanctions represents a 13 percent increase for states with comparable data over the 2006-07 school year.
Of those falling short of their academic-achievement goals, 3,559 schools—4 percent of all schools rated based on their progress—are facing the law’s more serious interventions in the current school year. That’s double the number that were in that... (The full story was released online 19 Dec 08 at Edweek.org)
The report above regarding the number of schools failing to meet AYP is just forerunner of reports to come.
Why? Simple; the states had to set up scheduled performance increases as part of the AYP system. The ultimate goal being that all schools are to achieve 100% student proficiency on the core subjects of reading and math by the year 2014. The situation facing the schools at this point is that the easy part of the schedule is over and more schools will start to fall behind as the standards grow in difficulty.
What few people know is the fact that the AYP standards for most states were initially set so low that most of the schools could meet AYP without any difficulty, without effort. As the standards increase and surpass the ability of the schools to meet the targets, more schools will fall into the failing category.
Thus each year the standards go up, more schools will fail to meet AYP. This is not because the standards are too difficult, it is simply because the schools are not capable of delivering any semblance of a quality education. This is why the education establishment objects to NCLB.
Think about it.
Almost 30,000 schools in the United States failed to make adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act in the 2007-08 school year. For states with comparable data for the 2006-07 school year, the number of such schools increased by 28 percent.
Half those schools missed their achievement goals for two or more years, putting almost one in five of the nation’s public schools in some stage of a federally mandated process designed to improve student achievement. The number facing sanctions represents a 13 percent increase for states with comparable data over the 2006-07 school year.
Of those falling short of their academic-achievement goals, 3,559 schools—4 percent of all schools rated based on their progress—are facing the law’s more serious interventions in the current school year. That’s double the number that were in that... (The full story was released online 19 Dec 08 at Edweek.org)
The report above regarding the number of schools failing to meet AYP is just forerunner of reports to come.
Why? Simple; the states had to set up scheduled performance increases as part of the AYP system. The ultimate goal being that all schools are to achieve 100% student proficiency on the core subjects of reading and math by the year 2014. The situation facing the schools at this point is that the easy part of the schedule is over and more schools will start to fall behind as the standards grow in difficulty.
What few people know is the fact that the AYP standards for most states were initially set so low that most of the schools could meet AYP without any difficulty, without effort. As the standards increase and surpass the ability of the schools to meet the targets, more schools will fall into the failing category.
Thus each year the standards go up, more schools will fail to meet AYP. This is not because the standards are too difficult, it is simply because the schools are not capable of delivering any semblance of a quality education. This is why the education establishment objects to NCLB.
Think about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)