Jonathan Alter, in last week's Newsweek, offers a drastic (and maybe necessary) way to boost American public school performance: get rid of the teachers who are dragging the system down.
The article begins as a commentary on Senator Barack Obama's recent appearances before the National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers, and his education policies. Alter asserts that teachers should be rewarded with higher pay for good work, but "removed from the classroom when they fail to improve", and then tries to say his view is in line with Obama's, though the senator doesn't usually bring this up. Wonder why.
I don't know whether Obama is really set on stricter teacher requirements (maybe you know? post it in the comments), but Alter's article is provocative and unapologetic. He says the U.S. ranks 25th among 30 industrialized countries in math, but gives no source and doesn't say which industrialized countries (or why there are only 30) are part of this ranking. This is my research topic for 649, so I can tell you that there has been huge controversy in the last 20 years about the validity of results like this. Even if the numbers don't lie, they way they are represented is sometimes misleading. For example, when the U.S. was ranked 19th out of 41 countries on the science section of the TIMSS (1997), many of the reports failed to mention that there was only a 10% score difference between 5th and 30th place (Bracey, 1998). Newsweek doesn't mention where this new statistic comes from (a test?), but often the test distribution is as follows: a few high-achieving East Asian nations at the top, most Western/other industrialized nations in the middle with very close scores, and a few low-achieving countries at the bottom.
So despite what I think of the fear factor, I find this article refreshing and Alter's evidence convincing. Ok, the other evidence (which admittedly, I have not checked). Apparently school districts nationwide fire, on average, only one teacher per year for poor performance, which, according to Alter, implies that "protecting incompetents is more important than educating children".
The accusations continue. He claims teachers resist (with hostility) accountability methods and that unions protect ineffective educators. Andy Stern, head of the Service Employees International Union (not strictly a teachers' union, but includes education) is quoted as saying, "I don't care if a teacher has a high school degree, college, or a Ph.D if he or she can produce results."
Is teacher accountability feasible? How can teacher quality be measured anyway, and should it? If you're a political junkie, let me know what Obama & McCain are saying about education reform.
Almost forgot. Here are my sources:
Alter, J. (2008, July 21). Obama's no-brainer on education. Newsweek, 35.
Bracey, G. (1998, January). TIMSS: The message and the myths. Principal, 77, 18-22.
Newsweek article says bad teachers should be fired
I used to think I was a pretty good teacher
And I probably was.
But I came to this program because I wanted professional training to complement my on-the-job experience. I knew there was a lot in the world of education I needed to learn, like how to meet external (state or district) standards, how to evaluate student performance in other ways besides tests, and how to use technology purposefully in the classroom (one of the key themes of 504).
Yesterday we watched this video of a fantastic (and I mean fantastic) German teacher that blew me away. Last year I was a foreign language teacher, I guess, but my lessons were pitifully boring compared to what this teacher did. She reviewed previously learned vocabulary (parts of the body) with a sort of Simon-says game that the students actually seemed enthusiastic about. She continued to use other kinesthetic activities throughout the lesson and explained why she though moving around/acting out vocabulary/drawing were important parts of the students' cognition. The aspect of the lesson that most impressed me was how the teacher gave the students confidence in their (limited) language abilities. She asked questions that allowed students to demonstrate the vocabulary and structures they knew, and she challenged the students to figure out new words using logic and prior knowledge.
So, for as much as I complain about some of the content and assignments, I'm saying on the record that I am getting much of what I came for. Though I hate, hate, hate the taxonomy table and cringe at every mention of "cognitive dimensions", I know that it will help me broaden my teaching and tap into different (and higher) ways that students learn. And as much as I'm struggling to make terms like "metacognition" and "backward design" and "scaffolding" part of my new vocabulary (and relevant), I really do understand that these concepts are useful.
And you can remind me of this next time you hear me complain. Which will probably be in the next few hours.
Oh, and I'm doing my research on differences in East Asian and Western educational practices. I'll write more about this later (ok, maybe) but so far it's really interesting.
stick a feather in your cap and call it high-tech
I put a photocopier in my dream classroom.
No one else mentioned it in our discussion, so I kept it quietly in the corner by the window in my drawing. I have a bit of prior teaching experience (you can see my profile or just ask me if you want to know more about it), and I'll say now that one of the biggest sources of stress during that time was the photocopier! Once, I had to ask a senior colleague repeatedly, "Are you finished?" because he was checking his stocks online between copy jobs.
One of the most interesting ways I've seen technology used is as a feather in a school's cap. Promotional material boasts of computer labs, digital imaging facilities, teachers integrating technology, digitized library resources...how much of it is used regularly and appropriately, and how much of it sits untouched? (and how many staff members are completely clueless or terrified to give it a try? get this: I had a colleague at my former school who essentially refused to type documents and preferred to write everything by hand). My former school boasted a driving simulation room, an observatory, a robotics center, and a nano-something lab (sounded very high-tech), none of which I was ever given permission or instructions to use. Ok, so we don't usually let students look through telescopes in English class, but still - it would have been nice to have had a tour. And maybe even encouragement that I could and should try to use some of these resources in my teaching.
Being able to use technology (or at least say you can) can help you get a teaching job, too. Several of the job openings I've seen recently list something like"integrating technology in the classroom" as a criteria for employment.
Technology is a selling point, just like modern facilities and big-name faculty. For your enjoyment, I'm including a propaganda photo of "professional development" from my former school.
