This post came through my blog feeds this morning. I think it is interesting, even if part of the conversation turned to TFA. TFA isn't scalable, nor are the charter school outfits. Additionally, it is debatable what the statistics actually reflect- charter school success? skimming high achievers? or what?
What I always wonder is why the public conversation rarely (if ever) turns to what good pedagogy is, and what exemplifies it. High test scores, which are often tied to merit pay, seem to assume good pedagogy but is that true? Additionally, why is it that we give a single test (used for achievement- not formative assessments in this case) where other professions look at a broader spectrum of results? Oy vey.
Showing posts with label merit pay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label merit pay. Show all posts
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Human Resources
I've gotten into twitter. I am sure I will become bored of it, but I enjoy following folks. In some cases, such as this week(end) it is useful as people will tweet the results from sporting events (such as the NCAA Track Champs). But I read an interesting tweet (or two) from a teacher. He had a conversation with a business woman about scripted curricula. Long story short, her response was one of turning an HR problem into a curriculum and instruction problem.
I hadn't really thought about it exactly that way. I guess I had resigned myself to the issues that education has in human resources, namely that you can't get rid of "bad teachers." What "bad" means is open to interpretation, but I take it to mean those that aren't steeped in "good" pedagogy, and aren't helping students grow as learners. They lack the knowledge of instructional strategies to help their students grow.
Why do we have these HR problems? I am not saying run schools as businesses or corporations, as they are different entities. While you can say schools "produce a product," not all of our "products" are the same. But that doesn't absolve us of letting bad teachers, poor providers of instruction, continue to educate kids.
I hadn't really thought about it exactly that way. I guess I had resigned myself to the issues that education has in human resources, namely that you can't get rid of "bad teachers." What "bad" means is open to interpretation, but I take it to mean those that aren't steeped in "good" pedagogy, and aren't helping students grow as learners. They lack the knowledge of instructional strategies to help their students grow.
Why do we have these HR problems? I am not saying run schools as businesses or corporations, as they are different entities. While you can say schools "produce a product," not all of our "products" are the same. But that doesn't absolve us of letting bad teachers, poor providers of instruction, continue to educate kids.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Charter Schools
My wife and I went to the Second Ascent Twilight Criterium bike race over the weekend. There we ran into a friend who was also in education. Naturally the conversation turned to schools, as it always seems to with folks in education. We were weaving through topics ranging from my wife's classroom to my student teaching to hiring, and somehow to charter schools.
Our friend is a believer that the system, as it currently stands, is broken. We are educating kids, but we aren't meeting the needs of all of the kids in the system (not by a long shot). I certainly agree. The parent group pushing for merit pay, or at least a system that doesn't jettison its youth, was also mentioned. Our friend mentioned how the push for merit pay, and charter schools, could be something that helps deconstruct the system so that it can be rebuilt to better serve kids.
That got me thinking about charters as a whole, particularly as Geoffrey Canada will be here in the fall for Solid Ground's Annual Luncheon. He, if you will remember, is the creator of the Harlem Children's Zone. The HCZ got a ton of press when Obama was campaigning, as was seen as what our nation needs more of. The hubbub around the HCZ makes me shake my head in amazement.
The program isn't scalable for starters. Those that think it could be done without the money are fooling themselves. I am sure there are many great elementary schools with far less money, but they represent a vast minority not the majority. Comparing HCZ to the public schools in Harlem would also show a massive disparity in funding. But let's get away from funding, as Jonathan Kozol has been pushing that for years and people still don't want to believe him!
Charter schools can take liberties that public schools can't. If you don't cut it in their system, from grades to decorum, you can be shipped out. What does shipping a student out do? First is that it takes that student out of the statistical equation for the charter school. Second is that the student needs to go somewhere, with the likely landing spot being public school. When people go to look at the statistics, the charter school can pump itself up... but also benefits from a bump down for the public school it is comparing itself to! Bridging Differences does a great job of looking at charters, particularly Mr. Canada's.
I have nothing against Mr. Canada or the HCZ. I even have a friend that is a principal of a new KIPP school in Baltimore (opening this fall). What I have a problem with is turning our backs on kids and families. We have an obligation to teach all children, not just the ones that we think will help us most.
Our friend is a believer that the system, as it currently stands, is broken. We are educating kids, but we aren't meeting the needs of all of the kids in the system (not by a long shot). I certainly agree. The parent group pushing for merit pay, or at least a system that doesn't jettison its youth, was also mentioned. Our friend mentioned how the push for merit pay, and charter schools, could be something that helps deconstruct the system so that it can be rebuilt to better serve kids.
That got me thinking about charters as a whole, particularly as Geoffrey Canada will be here in the fall for Solid Ground's Annual Luncheon. He, if you will remember, is the creator of the Harlem Children's Zone. The HCZ got a ton of press when Obama was campaigning, as was seen as what our nation needs more of. The hubbub around the HCZ makes me shake my head in amazement.
The program isn't scalable for starters. Those that think it could be done without the money are fooling themselves. I am sure there are many great elementary schools with far less money, but they represent a vast minority not the majority. Comparing HCZ to the public schools in Harlem would also show a massive disparity in funding. But let's get away from funding, as Jonathan Kozol has been pushing that for years and people still don't want to believe him!
Charter schools can take liberties that public schools can't. If you don't cut it in their system, from grades to decorum, you can be shipped out. What does shipping a student out do? First is that it takes that student out of the statistical equation for the charter school. Second is that the student needs to go somewhere, with the likely landing spot being public school. When people go to look at the statistics, the charter school can pump itself up... but also benefits from a bump down for the public school it is comparing itself to! Bridging Differences does a great job of looking at charters, particularly Mr. Canada's.
I have nothing against Mr. Canada or the HCZ. I even have a friend that is a principal of a new KIPP school in Baltimore (opening this fall). What I have a problem with is turning our backs on kids and families. We have an obligation to teach all children, not just the ones that we think will help us most.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Application Happy
Now is not the best time to be completing teacher certification. Many districts have RIF'd (laid off), and jobs just aren't there to submit applications for. Nonetheless I continue to put all my stuff together, and get my ducks in a row prior to the start of summer. Summer brings uncertainty, as everyone scatters- not good for references etc.
In Seattle, like many places, there are people and organizations that are upset by how the layoffs are being done. I get that the purpose of the union is to protect teachers. Without a union, the oldest would likely be skimmed off the pool as they are the most costly (although my guess would be that it might be publicized as a skill-set issue, not purely economic). What kills me, particularly as someone that is applying now (with ZERO seniority), is that the bottom of the totem pole continually gets chopped off. I am not sure what is worse: A) being cut simply based on time worked, or B) having a job based on time worked (not because of skills).
While I see merit pay as having flaws, there needs to be a better way than is currently being used. I also truly believe that the people who need to worry most about merit pay are those that have holes in their practice. What other assessment is there of our teaching practice? Principals do evaluations, but in many cases it takes a preponderance of evidence to remove bad teachers. How else can we ensure that we are providing great instruction... and not a set of instructions?
In Seattle, like many places, there are people and organizations that are upset by how the layoffs are being done. I get that the purpose of the union is to protect teachers. Without a union, the oldest would likely be skimmed off the pool as they are the most costly (although my guess would be that it might be publicized as a skill-set issue, not purely economic). What kills me, particularly as someone that is applying now (with ZERO seniority), is that the bottom of the totem pole continually gets chopped off. I am not sure what is worse: A) being cut simply based on time worked, or B) having a job based on time worked (not because of skills).
While I see merit pay as having flaws, there needs to be a better way than is currently being used. I also truly believe that the people who need to worry most about merit pay are those that have holes in their practice. What other assessment is there of our teaching practice? Principals do evaluations, but in many cases it takes a preponderance of evidence to remove bad teachers. How else can we ensure that we are providing great instruction... and not a set of instructions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)