Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(the daily wilton)   Connecticut teachers will now be evaluated mainly on student performance, which makes you wonder what they were being evaluated on before. No, seriously. What were they evaluated on before?   (thedailywilton.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Connecticut Education Association, Fairfield County, Norwalk, student performance, Hartford, education reform, school boards, teachers  
•       •       •

3275 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2012 at 9:54 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



241 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-31 10:06:12 AM  

BMFPitt: But what you seem to be saying is that a trained teacher and a random person off the street, given the same class, would have barely distinguishable results on test scores, based entirely on parental education.


I have not suggested anything of the kind.
 
2012-01-31 10:10:56 AM  

ginandbacon: BMFPitt: But what you seem to be saying is that a trained teacher and a random person off the street, given the same class, would have barely distinguishable results on test scores, based entirely on parental education.

I have not suggested anything of the kind.


When you say all that test scores will tell you is how well off or educated the parents are that is exactly what you are saying.


Test scores tell you how much and what kind of education parents got, that's really it,

Standardized tests will uncover which students come from an educated household with lots of books and a reverence of education and which don't. They really can't tell you how effective a particular teacher is
 
2012-01-31 10:11:45 AM  

liam76: You can't find a better objective measure.


Just out of curiosity, what "objective" measures are used to determine your performance at work? Not to mention how much your compensation will be?
 
2012-01-31 10:11:56 AM  
so if the teacher's students fail do you have to punish the teacher?

Like bend her over her desk and spank her?
Because thats how most pornos start.
 
2012-01-31 10:13:59 AM  

liam76: CapnBlues: the idea is that if you approach test scores with a multivariate regression and correlation analysis, the strongest predictor of test performance is parental education and/or intelligence. It overwhelms all other predictors. Think of it like a bunch of venn diagrams. The biggest chunk of the "test score" circle is taken away by the overlapping 'parental education' circle. There's an extent to which school quality, teacher quality, technology in the classroom, and a variety of other factors overlap with "test score" and also with "parental education," but pretty much no matter which way you slice those overlaps, parsimony demands that you lend the greatest credence to "parental education."

But then again, a lot of "education reformers" don't believe in the fields of "statistics" and "science"

So, once again if teachers have such little impact, why not just pay them minimum wage?

Also nobody is suggesting rating teachers on raw test scores. If you look at students performance in years past and compare teachers against students with similiar scores you level the playing field with respect to students background.


What you seem to be mixing up here, over and over, is that test scores are not the same thing as education. Test scores are one very limited and flawed metric for learning and education. Hell, you even bolded the words "test scores" in my response when you quoted it, so I'm really quite mystified why you're not understanding the distinction between LEARNING and TEST SCORES. Even if you look at improvement on test scores, even if you normalize it with a Fisher-Z transformation, the fundamental issue of whether the test reflects education is not changed. Raw, transformed, normalized, whatever form you decide the test scores should take, they are not the same thing as a measurement of learning. That will not change.
 
2012-01-31 10:15:13 AM  

liam76: When you say all that test scores will tell you is how well off or educated the parents are that is exactly what you are saying.


No it's not. I am simply saying that that is not a very good way to measure teacher performance. It is an excellent way to measure family background.
 
2012-01-31 10:15:24 AM  

ginandbacon: BMFPitt: But what you seem to be saying is that a trained teacher and a random person off the street, given the same class, would have barely distinguishable results on test scores, based entirely on parental education.

I have not suggested anything of the kind.


Then you agree that the scores can be used as part of an objective measurement of quality?

Because it's really one or the other.
 
2012-01-31 10:22:04 AM  

BMFPitt: ginandbacon: BMFPitt: But what you seem to be saying is that a trained teacher and a random person off the street, given the same class, would have barely distinguishable results on test scores, based entirely on parental education.

I have not suggested anything of the kind.

Then you agree that the scores can be used as part of an objective measurement of quality?

Because it's really one or the other.


Actually, I agree that for any given year of education, a random bum off the street will not have an enormous effect on test scores. What you have to keep in mind is that a student in 12th grade has 11 (or 12, counting kindergarten) years of prior education contributing to their current test scores. To punish their 12th grade teacher based on the students' test scores in that year is... well, it's not just. It's simply not just.

A 12th grader is expected to know how to construct a 5-paragraph composition, including intro, conclusion, three body paragraphs, each of which is organized in a similar 3-subpoint structure. In order to do that, the student must know how to spell, which is generally taught in grades k-5. The student must also know how to write by hand, also taught k-5. The student needs to know how to construct a sentence, including syntax/grammar and style, a skill taught over the course of the entire prior 11-12 years of education. These are just a few of the fundamental skills necessary for a 12th grader to perform the bare minimum expected, and the plan is to punish or reward their teachers based on what every teacher prior to that year has done?

Do you realize how deeply flawed this kind of thinking is? how deeply irresponsible and unfair it is?
 
2012-01-31 10:25:16 AM  

ginandbacon: liam76: When you say all that test scores will tell you is how well off or educated the parents are that is exactly what you are saying.

No it's not. I am simply saying that that is not a very good way to measure teacher performance. It is an excellent way to measure family background.


You did say these line, right?

Test scores tell you how much and what kind of education parents got, that's really it,

Standardized tests will uncover which students come from an educated household with lots of books and a reverence of education and which don't. They really can't tell you how effective a particular teacher is


If "that is really it" then students grades on test scores won't change if you have a great teacher or some bum "teaching" the class.

If they really can't tell you how effective the teacher is then the scores would be the same if it is a good teacher or a bum.
 
2012-01-31 10:26:41 AM  

ginandbacon: liam76: You can't find a better objective measure.

Just out of curiosity, what "objective" measures are used to determine your performance at work? Not to mention how much your compensation will be?


There are 2 layers of them.  One for my whole group which measures a whole set of success metrics with the performance of our product.  Yet I don't say, "That's not fair!  User error could ruin all of those metrics!"  And one for me individually, which is much more based on observations of my superiors than by objective metrics, but still takes a cursory look at a lot of metrics into account.  I am ranked against my peers and only a subset get more money from this. Yet I don't say, "But my boss might be evil and just say I'm bad because s/he hates me!". My compensation is almost entirely based on these two things.
 
2012-01-31 10:27:48 AM  

BMFPitt: Because it's really one or the other.


I see you are familiar with the concepts of black and white, may I take this opportunity to introduce you to the concept of grey?
 
2012-01-31 10:28:58 AM  

CapnBlues: BMFPitt: ginandbacon: BMFPitt: But what you seem to be saying is that a trained teacher and a random person off the street, given the same class, would have barely distinguishable results on test scores, based entirely on parental education.

I have not suggested anything of the kind.

Then you agree that the scores can be used as part of an objective measurement of quality?

Because it's really one or the other.

Actually, I agree that for any given year of education, a random bum off the street will not have an enormous effect on test scores. What you have to keep in mind is that a student in 12th grade has 11 (or 12, counting kindergarten) years of prior education contributing to their current test scores. To punish their 12th grade teacher based on the students' test scores in that year is... well, it's not just. It's simply not just.

A 12th grader is expected to know how to construct a 5-paragraph composition, including intro, conclusion, three body paragraphs, each of which is organized in a similar 3-subpoint structure. In order to do that, the student must know how to spell, which is generally taught in grades k-5. The student must also know how to write by hand, also taught k-5. The student needs to know how to construct a sentence, including syntax/grammar and style, a skill taught over the course of the entire prior 11-12 years of education. These are just a few of the fundamental skills necessary for a 12th grader to perform the bare minimum expected, and the plan is to punish or reward their teachers based on what every teacher prior to that year has done?

Do you realize how deeply flawed this kind of thinking is? how deeply irresponsible and unfair it is?


Your entire argument is based on the idea that we cannot track test scores from year to year and see improvement or lack thereof.
 
2012-01-31 10:30:20 AM  

ginandbacon: BMFPitt: Because it's really one or the other.

I see you are familiar with the concepts of black and white, may I take this opportunity to introduce you to the concept of grey?


There is no shade of gray between Zero and Not Zero.
 
2012-01-31 10:31:05 AM  

BMFPitt: ginandbacon: liam76: You can't find a better objective measure.

Just out of curiosity, what "objective" measures are used to determine your performance at work? Not to mention how much your compensation will be?

There are 2 layers of them.  One for my whole group which measures a whole set of success metrics with the performance of our product.  Yet I don't say, "That's not fair!  User error could ruin all of those metrics!"  And one for me individually, which is much more based on observations of my superiors than by objective metrics, but still takes a cursory look at a lot of metrics into account.  I am ranked against my peers and only a subset get more money from this. Yet I don't say, "But my boss might be evil and just say I'm bad because s/he hates me!". My compensation is almost entirely based on these two things.


Out of curiosity, can your company, whatever it is, drop clients who cost too much money to service? Like, you're not making any money on that client, and you can't justifiably raise the cost of their service, can you just drop them? Because that is NOT how education works. If you have students who require immense amounts of resources to educate, you still have to pay for their education.

The problem with running public education "like a business" is that it is not like a business. It shares some characteristics with businesses, such as having employees and overhead, but there are some very fundamental differences. When education is run as a business, such as at for-profit colleges and universities, you find that students pay way more, have worse prospects for jobs, and overall have lower satisfaction with the experience.
 
2012-01-31 10:36:22 AM  

BMFPitt: Your entire argument is based on the idea that we cannot track test scores from year to year and see improvement or lack thereof.


No, it is not. The problem is that even if you do track improvement, you are holding a 12th grade teacher responsible for the actions of the prior 11 years of teachers. If the 12th grade teacher has to teach remediation, they will never get students to 12th grade levels of performance.

I'm not going to change your mind, am I? You are locked into your completely unempirical, gut-level beliefs about market-driven solutions to non-market problems, and you will not be moved. So i give up -- you win. Go vote to have teacher pay cut, and see what happens. You're going to get terrible teachers. But go for it, see how that works out. Eat shiat. eat my shiat.
 
2012-01-31 10:36:53 AM  

CapnBlues: BMFPitt: ginandbacon: liam76: You can't find a better objective measure.

Just out of curiosity, what "objective" measures are used to determine your performance at work? Not to mention how much your compensation will be?

There are 2 layers of them.  One for my whole group which measures a whole set of success metrics with the performance of our product.  Yet I don't say, "That's not fair!  User error could ruin all of those metrics!"  And one for me individually, which is much more based on observations of my superiors than by objective metrics, but still takes a cursory look at a lot of metrics into account.  I am ranked against my peers and only a subset get more money from this. Yet I don't say, "But my boss might be evil and just say I'm bad because s/he hates me!". My compensation is almost entirely based on these two things.

Out of curiosity, can your company, whatever it is, drop clients who cost too much money to service? Like, you're not making any money on that client, and you can't justifiably raise the cost of their service, can you just drop them? Because that is NOT how education works. If you have students who require immense amounts of resources to educate, you still have to pay for their education.

The problem with running public education "like a business" is that it is not like a business. It shares some characteristics with businesses, such as having employees and overhead, but there are some very fundamental differences. When education is run as a business, such as at for-profit colleges and universities, you find that students pay way more, have worse prospects for jobs, and overall have lower satisfaction with the experience.


I'll take your radical change of direction towards a wholly unrelated topic and interpret it as an admission that you recognize you have lost that argument.
 
2012-01-31 10:39:13 AM  

CapnBlues: BMFPitt


You keep writing out most of what I want to say but can't bring myself to bother to type. I find these conversations enervating. Thank you for stating what needs to be said and for fighting the good fight. You are my latest favorite.
 
2012-01-31 10:43:14 AM  

BMFPitt: I'll take your radical change of direction towards a wholly unrelated topic and interpret it as an admission that you recognize you have lost that argument.


That would be a not terribly surprising avoidance of a thoughtful discussion on a very complicated topic.
 
2012-01-31 10:53:36 AM  

ginandbacon: CapnBlues: BMFPitt

You keep writing out most of what I want to say but can't bring myself to bother to type. I find these conversations enervating. Thank you for stating what needs to be said and for fighting the good fight. You are my latest favorite.


thanks, friend. at a certain point, you have to realize you're trying to change the mind of someone who was deeply betrayed by education at some point and just wants to screw over the entire institution. It's a sad grudge kind of thing, and there's no way to turn that grudge. I would never say we should give up on difficult kids, but difficult adults? At some point you have to give up on them, because they refuse to accept anything but their own narrowly-defined view of behavior and/or economics. It's doctrine to them, you know? Like a sort of religious adherence to beliefs about the world -- tax cuts raise revenue and create jobs. Teachers without accountability will be worse teachers and will not work hard. Students with the right instruction always learn. These things have very little if any empirical support, but that's not relevant to the True Believers out there. They believe these things not as empirically supported principles, but rather as axioms of faith. You can't change an axiom of faith with logic, nor with data, nor with the combination of logic and data.

There's also the distinct possibility that we're being trolled HARD. Like, real hard. I hate it when I realize that's what going on.
 
2012-01-31 10:55:02 AM  

Little.Alex: You are comparing Apples to Oranges. Teachers work fewer hours, and have less real education. The curriculum is unbelievable soft - no math, no science. And many universities offer a masters in ed in only 10 weeks!


Teachers work fewer hours and have less real education than bricklayers?

Are you serious here?

As I said, my father was a teacher. He got home a little after 5 o'clock. Mom had dinner waiting. Then dad got back to work. I used to resent like hell that he had so much time for other people's kids, but none for his own. At least when a bricklayer gets home from work, he's home, not still working. The average school may be in session from 8 to 3, but teachers don't show up for work the minute the kids get in -- they've already been there, and already working, before the students arrive. And they don't teleport home when the kids leave, either; there's still more work to do, and more work to do off the clock, at home, on what would be "their own time" if they were bricklayers.

When I lived in CA, a couple of friends of my roommate were teachers; we lived in the same small apartment building for a while. When they got home, they stayed home. They still had work to do.

Students' hours are 8 to 3; teachers' are much, much longer. Those 7 hours a day (no, they don't get an hour for lunch; they get a period to eat while they're working) are just the start of it.

As for "no math, no science" ... just for the hell of it, I looked up the requirements for a bachelor's degree program in elementary education at Penn State. Entry to the major (not even graduation, mind you; entry to the major) requires, among other things, 6 credits of college math. The major specifies "3 credits each (including one with a lab) from biological science, earth science, and physical science." If you want to try to sort out the rest of it, it's here (new window). I suspect your average teacher has more college math and science courses than your average bricklayer.

Let me ask you this -- you, and everyone reading this who isn't a teacher:

If teachers get paid so well, for so little work, and it's so easy to become qualified ... how come you're not a teacher? Why not rake in that easy money? You can do it with less education than a bricklayer, make lots of money, have all that time off ... what's not to like? Why not do it?

Or do you realize that maybe it's not all that easy, after all?
 
2012-01-31 10:56:03 AM  

CapnBlues: There's also the distinct possibility that we're being trolled HARD. Like, real hard. I hate it when I realize that's what going on.


All in all, it was worth it to have met you.
 
2012-01-31 10:56:55 AM  

CapnBlues: BMFPitt: Your entire argument is based on the idea that we cannot track test scores from year to year and see improvement or lack thereof.

No, it is not. The problem is that even if you do track improvement, you are holding a 12th grade teacher responsible for the actions of the prior 11 years of teachers. If the 12th grade teacher has to teach remediation, they will never get students to 12th grade levels of performance.

I'm not going to change your mind, am I? You are locked into your completely unempirical, gut-level beliefs about market-driven solutions to non-market problems, and you will not be moved. So i give up -- you win. Go vote to have teacher pay cut, and see what happens. You're going to get terrible teachers. But go for it, see how that works out. Eat shiat. eat my shiat.


Speaking of unempirical gut-level beliefs, you seem to completely disregard the ability of statistical analysis to factor out variables.

What teacher pay cut are you talking about, though?  If I were supreme ruler of my school district, teachers would be making more money.  It just might not be the same ones we have now after a few years.  I would love to have my hypothetical town side by side with yours and see how the kids were doing 50 years down the line.  Then you could blame it all on the parents in your town.
 
2012-01-31 10:58:25 AM  

ginandbacon: BMFPitt: I'll take your radical change of direction towards a wholly unrelated topic and interpret it as an admission that you recognize you have lost that argument.

That would be a not terribly surprising avoidance of a thoughtful discussion on a very complicated topic.


I'm avoiding the "Public education is just like private business" argument for the same reason that I am avoiding the "The sky is purple" argument.  I don't have the inclanation to defend a statement that I have never made.
 
2012-01-31 10:59:16 AM  

Worldwalker: it's not all that easy, after all?


As I stated at the beginning of this thread, I volunteer as a tutor at a school that faces extreme challenges. I have two students twice a week. I could never do what the full time teachers do.

It would crush me.
 
2012-01-31 11:06:45 AM  

CapnBlues: ginandbacon: CapnBlues: BMFPitt

You keep writing out most of what I want to say but can't bring myself to bother to type. I find these conversations enervating. Thank you for stating what needs to be said and for fighting the good fight. You are my latest favorite.

thanks, friend. at a certain point, you have to realize you're trying to change the mind of someone who was deeply betrayed by education at some point and just wants to screw over the entire institution. It's a sad grudge kind of thing, and there's no way to turn that grudge. I would never say we should give up on difficult kids, but difficult adults? At some point you have to give up on them, because they refuse to accept anything but their own narrowly-defined view of behavior and/or economics. It's doctrine to them, you know? Like a sort of religious adherence to beliefs about the world -- tax cuts raise revenue and create jobs. Teachers without accountability will be worse teachers and will not work hard. Students with the right instruction always learn. These things have very little if any empirical support, but that's not relevant to the True Believers out there. They believe these things not as empirically supported principles, but rather as axioms of faith. You can't change an axiom of faith with logic, nor with data, nor with the combination of logic and data.

There's also the distinct possibility that we're being trolled HARD. Like, real hard. I hate it when I realize that's what going on.


Speaking of cult-like indoctrination, you have attributed a whole lot of beliefs to me with no rational basis for thinking I believe them.  In some cases with direct evidence to the contrary.  Your inability to argue with a non-strawman is pretty glaring.
 
2012-01-31 11:08:32 AM  

ginandbacon: CapnBlues: There's also the distinct possibility that we're being trolled HARD. Like, real hard. I hate it when I realize that's what going on.

All in all, it was worth it to have met you.


likewise, buddy. you're on my list, too.
 
2012-01-31 11:11:00 AM  

CapnBlues: ginandbacon: CapnBlues: There's also the distinct possibility that we're being trolled HARD. Like, real hard. I hate it when I realize that's what going on.

All in all, it was worth it to have met you.

likewise, buddy. you're on my list, too.


Not a bad day on Fark. Not bad at all.
 
2012-01-31 11:18:55 AM  

Worldwalker: Little.Alex: Actually; what you said is completely false. Teachers make well above average bank, with loads of benefits, for working a 5 or 6 hour day, 8 months a year.
[daddy didn't give attention...blah...blah...blah...]


We can debate whether increasing teacher is the "right" thing to do, and how much teachers _should_ be getting paid. But that's not the debate here. The debate is about how to improve student performance. They're two quite separate discussions, and there is no evidence that increasing school budgets or teacher pay has any effect on student performance. There is some evidence that more accurately evaluating teacher performance has a positive effect on student performance.
 
2012-01-31 11:37:27 AM  

mamoru: historycat: /anybody looking for someone with excellent presentation skills, excellent research skills, and is hard worker?

Have you considered seeking to teach in a country where teachers are actually respected and the job is enjoyable and fulfilling without most of the hassles I hear about from teachers in the States? I know from direct experience that Japan and Morocco are good for this. I've heard great things about Scandinavian countries. Thailand (my current location) is alright, but the pay is really low (though quite liveable by Thai standards). I've heard mixed things, though more good than bad about both New Zealand and Australia. I've heard horror stories about UK and France, though, so they might be places to avoid...

Anyway, just a suggestion. While the USA may not care about keeping good teachers and making sure students are educated, the rest of the world welcomes good teachers.


Funny you mention that. I just got observed again, except this time he brought Administrators from Taiwan to observe me.

If I'm so bad, why show me off internationally?
 
2012-01-31 12:10:32 PM  

torch: Whatever the teachers' union wanted, that's what.


This. Seniority and loyalty to the Union mostly.
 
2012-01-31 12:17:16 PM  
I wonder when we're gonna evaluate parents based on student performance.

Since there are more shiatty-ass parents than there are teachers, my guess is, never.

But we should.

It would be interesting to see what grades parents would receive from teachers on things like "gives a shiat about student's progress" and "shows up at parent-teacher conferences" and "only contacts the school when kid gets in trouble for something and always assumes it's the school, not the kid, at fault."
 
2012-01-31 12:39:58 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: I wonder when we're gonna evaluate parents based on student performance.

Since there are more shiatty-ass parents than there are teachers, my guess is, never.

But we should.

It would be interesting to see what grades parents would receive from teachers on things like "gives a shiat about student's progress" and "shows up at parent-teacher conferences" and "only contacts the school when kid gets in trouble for something and always assumes it's the school, not the kid, at fault."


I am guessing it is "never" because we don't pay parents for having kids nor do we take them away fromt heir parents for not paying enough attention to their schooling.
 
kgf
2012-01-31 01:01:36 PM  
Ah, yes. Life is so simple when everything is in black and white.

So here's a scenario for you to consider - teacher evaluations are now based on student performance. A principal intensely dislikes a teacher, so that principal consistently assigns the worst students to that teacher. The teacher now appears to be bad because her students are all doing badly. Viola! Principal gets rid of teacher.

Or how about this? A small group of students in a teacher's class intentionally fail to make the teacher look bad.

Or, an urban school in a bad neighborhood is the only place where a teacher is able to find a job. That teacher, along with all the others, is now permanently stuck being a "bad" teacher because the students do not perform well.

A teacher should not be judged by the performance if his/her students, but rather by whether or not he/she is teaching the curriculum assigned by the school district in the manner ascribed by the district.
 
2012-01-31 01:20:04 PM  

kgf: Ah, yes. Life is so simple when everything is in black and white.

So here's a scenario for you to consider - teacher evaluations are now based on student performance. A principal intensely dislikes a teacher, so that principal consistently assigns the worst students to that teacher. The teacher now appears to be bad because her students are all doing badly. Viola! Principal gets rid of teacher.

Or how about this? A small group of students in a teacher's class intentionally fail to make the teacher look bad.

Or, an urban school in a bad neighborhood is the only place where a teacher is able to find a job. That teacher, along with all the others, is now permanently stuck being a "bad" teacher because the students do not perform well.

A teacher should not be judged by the performance if his/her students, but rather by whether or not he/she is teaching the curriculum assigned by the school district in the manner ascribed by the district.


If somebody was suggesting ratring teachers on raw scores from students this would be a decent point. however as has been popinted out in thei thread and in every thread on this topic that is not the case. Any system looking at standardized stores will track scores, and compare teachers who have similiar students.
 
2012-01-31 01:21:24 PM  

kgf: Ah, yes. Life is so simple when everything is in black and white.

So here's a scenario for you to consider - teacher evaluations are now based on student performance. A principal intensely dislikes a teacher, so that principal consistently assigns the worst students to that teacher. The teacher now appears to be bad because her students are all doing badly. Viola! Principal gets rid of teacher.

Or how about this? A small group of students in a teacher's class intentionally fail to make the teacher look bad.

Or, an urban school in a bad neighborhood is the only place where a teacher is able to find a job. That teacher, along with all the others, is now permanently stuck being a "bad" teacher because the students do not perform well.

A teacher should not be judged by the performance if his/her students, but rather by whether or not he/she is teaching the curriculum assigned by the school district in the manner ascribed by the district.


In scenarios 1 and 3, the teacher does just fine because the grading is based on incremental performance in comparison to the past record of the individual students.  In fact, for a good teacher getting bad students may actually make it easier to get higher grades because there's more room to improve.

In scenario 2, a pretty big conspiracy of students willing to throw a test stretching multiple grades would be required.  This happening is about as likely as the TSA actually thrawrting a terrorist.
 
2012-01-31 01:39:05 PM  

bugontherug: torch: Whatever the teachers' union wanted, that's what.

Yeah. The teachers' union demanded that teachers be evaluated by objective criteria within their control. Ridiculous factors like experience teaching, and relevant education. I'm glad to see that finally someone will be evaluating teachers based on the intelligence and work ethic of their students, which is not within their control, instead of the fair, objectively assessable crap unions demanded.


Experience = seniority = not an indicator of excellence
Relevant education = known from the beginning and ongoing basis, also not an indicator of ability to teach.
So thanks for making my point.
 
2012-01-31 02:45:50 PM  
CSB, here are my experiences as a teacher.

My first teaching job was to teach in El Dorado, AR. First ever job and when i showed up I was told that all the other teachers gave up their Remedial/SPED math courses to have me teach them. So, my first teaching job I was handed 6 hours of teaching a mixed class of remedial and Spec. Ed students. In theory I was supposed to have a Spec. Ed Teacher in class with me to help me since I am not a SPED teacher. She decided to not show up to my classes after the first week. I refuse to believe that my pay should be tied to how kids who can't identify the +,-,x, and division sign perform at a 10th grade level. And that is exactly the kind of standard I was expected to hold them to. That same semester I was relieved of half my classes so they could hire a new football coach.

Apparently I must have been awesome at preventing the kids from setting my room on fire because I was offered a job the following year working at the local alternative education school (The school for expelled kids)

BTW, pay for this job is $37,000 a year.

I left that position to teach 7th and 8th grade social studies in Delcambre, LA. Loved it. Kids performed well. They had better scores than the previous year. I was let go to hire a football coach.

That pay was $40,000 a year.

My last job was teaching hih school math at a Catholic School in Franklin, LA. After the Administration refused to back me up on disciplining a child for stealing my white board markers and taunting me to get them from him I took all my sick days in a row, and then some, and was fired and could nothave been happier.

That job paid $24,000 a year.

If ANYONE suggests tying teacher pay to student performance, then teachers should be able to draft kids into their class. My first year situation would have been impossible for anyone to succeed in. It is entirely unreasonable to hold teacher's solely accountable for student performance.
 
2012-02-01 07:55:54 AM  

torch: Experience = seniority = not an indicator of excellence
Relevant education = known from the beginning and ongoing basis, also not an indicator of ability to teach.
So thanks for making my point.


Actually Experience is a good indicator of teaching ability. Have you ever heard of someone having a good rookie season? Why put the qualifier on it if you're not taking their lack of experience into account for their performance.

The best teachers reflect on their previous experience and change what they do. They have been exposed to more situations and more students. They can adapt more and be quicker to adapt. They know when use a heavy hand and when to use a light touch. The best teachers are building on a base of experience after 20 years, yet still learning new ways.

Relevant Education is important as well. That's why states require us to be licensed and as part of that license we have to continue our education. We are not allowed to keep doing things the way we always have.

You think anyone can walk in and do this. That's the type of thinking that encourages people to major in education so they get summers off. I just call summers "Extended Planning Periods" cause I certainly don't get much of chance to plan lessons during the year.

That's why 50% of teachers don't make it 5 years.
 
2012-02-01 08:30:50 AM  

historycat: Actually Experience is a good indicator of teaching ability. Have you ever heard of someone having a good rookie season? Why put the qualifier on it if you're not taking their lack of experience into account for their performance.


It is a very poor indicator. Yes someoen at it 5 years is likely better then a first year teacher, but at a point how long youhave been doing it doesn't matter.

historycat: The best teachers reflect on their previous experience and change what they do. They have been exposed to more situations and more students. They can adapt more and be quicker to adapt. They know when use a heavy hand and when to use a light touch. The best teachers are building on a base of experience after 20 years, yet still learning new ways.


Just because you have experience teaching doesn't mean you are doing any of those things.


historycat: You think anyone can walk in and do this.


He didn't say that. The only people who did say that are those who claimed that test scores have nothing to do with the teacher but the parents (ginandbacon).

It is a tough job and I think teachers who are good at should get paid more. Unforrtunatly now it is set up so teachers who have been doing it longer get paid more.
 
2012-02-01 08:43:58 AM  

mmagdalene: FrancoFile: Longitudinal results.
Longitudinal results.

Ok, say it with me. Longitudinal results.

If you teach the 4th grade, and your average student left the 3rd grade at the 54th percentile in reading, and left the 4th grade at 55th percentile, then you are a successful teacher. If they left at 53rd percentile, you are not successful.

You're kidding, right? Imagine how easily the classroom average could be skewed by the addition of even one particularly good or particularly poor reader, a student moving away or an English Language Learners. Perhaps a cohort of students at that grade level received a semester of reading intervention at some point prior to taking your class, so they score well and you appear to be a highly effective teacher. The next year, you are put on a disciplinary action plan for having your percentage of proficient readers drop precipitously, while you're being told day in and day out to "do more with less."

An administrator who doesn't like you, or is friendly with another teacher at your grade level or in your area of specialization can quite easily stack the deck when assigning students to classes to favor one teacher over another. Even one student with persistent behavior problems can act as a drag on the entire class as learning time is reduced to deal with their outbursts. Imagine you get three of those students, as well as two who don't speak English and another one who is homeless. Last year you had 18 students; now you have 23.
Flu is sweeping through the school the week students test. School boundaries are redrawn...your average scores are compared to other schools in the state whereas the prior year they were only compared to other schools in the same district. The variables are endless when you're dealing with children, not the data-regurgitating robots teachers are asked to build.

As it stands now, the worst school in the state can make AYP and be hailed a great success as long as they make "expected" or even slightly high ...


wharblggarbl

1) You don't really understand the term "longitudinal results".
2) Excuses, excuses, excuses
3) So what's your alternative?
 
2012-02-03 01:30:48 AM  

Worldwalker: Little.Alex: Actually; what you said is completely false. Teachers make well above average bank, with loads of benefits, for working a 5 or 6 hour day, 8 months a year.

What gives you the idea that teachers work 5 or 6 hour days?

My father was a teacher. I remember, growing up, how badly I wanted my father to have been anything else, because then he'd have come home and have time for his kid. He didn't, though. He came home, ate dinner, and got back to work. There were tests to mark, papers to grade, lesson plans to write, and all the things that teachers do that are not done while they're in the classrooms with the kids.

"The average teacher in Connecticut makes $66550 per year, which is 115% of the state average income. Connecticut is one of the highest paying states to teach ..."

115% of the state average income. The mind boggles.

115% of an average that includes everything from other degreed professionals to high school students working at McDonald's.

The average teacher ... not one just starting out, mind you ... makes 66k a year in the highest-paying state for teachers ... a friend of mine made more than that fresh out of college in New Jersey. He's been at it a while now, six years experience. He's making more now than my father did on Long Island (adjusted via BLS inflation calculator) after 30 years experience, master's degree, and just short of a doctorate.

Let's look at that teacher in Connecticut. For the sake of discussion, I'll put him in Norwalk, solely because I've been there (there's a Penzey's Spices store there). Let's find something to compare his salary to ... how about a bricklayer? According to the state prevailing wage lists by town, a bricklayer rates $32.50 an hour. So a bricklayer working on a state or municipal job would be paid $67,600 per year (assuming no overtime).

Take a look at that again: $67,600 per year. For a bricklayer. The state of Connecticut pays its bricklayers more than it pays its teachers.

(for those who don't k ...


Alright. Let's tie teacher pay to military pay.

O-1 - graduate and enter the workforce at $42k
O-2 - year and a half later, get bumped to $54k
O-3 - four years in, get a raise to $63k
O-4 - about 6-10 years in, now you're making $68k

So a Major (Lt Cdr in the Navy - let's agree that's equivalent to an Asst Principal) gets paid just about what an average teacher in CT gets paid. The former also get to be shot at and detached from their families for months or years at a time, precluding the spouses with dependents from earning a supplemental income.

My dad was in the military - I guaranfarkingtee you that he wasn't around enough for me to even think about who he had more time to spend with than me, and he sure as shiat didn't have a couple months off every summer, plus vacations that coincided with mine. What did that sacrifice give him? A pension and healthcare. You know, very similar to what teachers get. It's a helluva lot more than anyone in the private sector gets. Anything I get on top of SS is out of my own damned hide.

Anything else to biatch about?
 
Displayed 41 of 241 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report