Education Reform Thread

[Ksandra]

No, I want people to stop thinking that teachers should, for some reason, be excluded from evaluations on their performance. How do you evaluate how well a teacher has taught? You want a committee? What is that committee going to look at? They're going to look at test scores. What do you expect them to do, look at grades the teacher in question is giving her own kids?

Look at their lesson plans and quizzes they give with the grades students receive on quizzes. All while looking at student demographics.

I'm sorry Ksandra, but people need to judge your performance in the class.

You keep saying this. I keep repeating, that it is FINE to judge teaching performance as long as that judgment process makes sense. Standardized testing does not make sense.

Making the excuse that the bonuses shouldn't replace better salaries is stupid, we should be doing both and not getting rid of one because we haven't fixed the other.

Yes we should do both. But we need to improve salaries first otherwise it won't happen because "bonuses."

[Ksandra]

You do realize teachers submit lesson plans that say every single day exactly what we are teaching right?

These need to match up with objectives tied to the common core standards, and we have to specifically state in the plan which standards are being met and how.


All the paperwork is already there.

[Blubbartron]

Salodin has apparently never heard of the old saying, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." Even the best teacher on the goddamn planet cannot teach some groups of children, because they don't want to be taught, and they will do everything up to and including extreme disruption of the class if you try. Teachers don't have power anymore, because parents are failing to instill fear and respect in their children for the teachers. Back in the good old days, the harshest punishment a teacher could dole out was a call to the parents, because the parents would annihilate their child if they didn't straighten up.

We don't have a problem with bad teachers in the U.S. (although there are some). We have a problem with large chunks of our society.

[Salodin]

You do realize teachers submit lesson plans that say every single day exactly what we are teaching right?

These need to match up with objectives tied to the common core standards, and we have to specifically state in the plan which standards are being met and how.


All the paperwork is already there.

You do realize that the majority of your plans go straight into a folder never to be looked at again, right? I mean, I've seen a principal do it right in front of me lmao. You honestly think some one is sitting down with every lesson plan, for every teacher, for all 180 days looking through to check for standards? That's out there with your committee plan. It's not the paperwork that's a problem, is teaching to the test that's a problem, but not every teacher has it. Some are better then others and they should be rewarded.

[Ksandra]

You do realize that the majority of your plans go straight into a folder never to be looked at again, right? I mean, I've seen a principal do it right in front of me lmao. You honestly think some one is sitting down with every lesson plan, for every teacher, for all 180 days looking through to check for standards? That's out there with your committee plan. It's not the paperwork that's a problem, is teaching to the test that's a problem, but not every teacher has it. Some are better then others and they should be rewarded.

Omg you may need a teacher to teach you reading comprehension. I didn't say people read it, I said it exists. I didn't say the committee exists, I said I want one to replace testing. We already make lesson plans, they could switch to a committee to review plans and see if actual student tests/quizzes match up. Do it every few years since teachers don't widely change their lessons every year. Pull a few random samples out of the year, not the entire one. And have your teacher gf teach you how to read this paragraph.

[Salodin]

You complain about my comprehension, yet comment like I think these committees exist. I never said that. You however say you wish there was a system like that in place, more on this in a minute. You say people don't read your plans (consistently), but you want people evaluate you based on them because it's those things and more that prove you're a good teacher, even if your lower level students say otherwise.

What you're asking for is a smaller scale "common core for teachers ®" that removes the expectations that a teacher produce quality students, and ask that it be replaced with a system that rewards teachers for knowing what they need to cover and teach, but doesn't hold them accountable for it. That's ludicrous. You're completely ignoring the fact that any one can share a lesson plan that follows the guidelines required (in a general sense this is what common core was), but no matter how good a plan you make it takes a talented teacher to instruct them and make sure the class stays on track. You should reward those teachers for their talent, not take away that incentive so that average to bad teachers can feel better because an outside source agrees that their lesson plans are a-ok and if a student isn't successful it's obviously not because the teacher isn't teaching the correct thing. This is the benefit of a bonus, and the reason why standardized testing should be a thing.

These incentives I mention, monetary bonuses being one but are certainly not the only benefit, encourages teachers to be better. What you're proposing is basically tenure, for bonus compensation. What you consistently fail to comprehend is my point: bonuses are not for compensating a teacher on the job they're being paid for already, they're there as incentives to encourage the professional to innovate and go above and beyond expectations. Yes, expectations are currently high, but only when compared to the base salary we give you now. If you were paid the salary you and I know you honestly deserve (probably 2x what you're being paid now), would you care about standardized testing and how it reflects on you, or even bonuses? I'm sure you agree that the good teachers are more than willing to go to that next level because they love their job and their students. Taking away bonuses doesn't fix your problem, it's just a scapegoat to bring lower tier teachers to the same level as better teachers, and a scarecrow to attack in order to rationalize a higher salary which you should already be earning.

Maybe I should ask directly, what is it about bonus pay for teachers you don't like? What about standardized testing? I assume the answer will have nothing to do with the concept itself, and more to do with how you think the option of a bonus somehow removes the need to pay you a better wage, or that your abilities as a teacher shouldn't be graded or questioned based on a single test most students take only a handful of times before they graduate high school. The truth is it's easier to blame bonuses and testing than any other intangible that has caused our culture to value our teachers the way we do now, and while our bonus structure and standardized tests absolutely need work to be more effective in their purpose, that doesn't mean doing away with them is the better answer.

Again, teachers need to be evaluated just like in any job. Testing the products they produce is, imo, the best way to do that. The test itself, and the bonus for doing good on the test, need to be worked on, but that's no excuse for doing away with them. I highly respect you and your profession, Ksandra, but just like any other profession I think it needs to constantly be scrutinized and improved.

I could go on, but this was already long enough lol. Next to the shit way bonuses work, and the ridiculousness that standardized testing affects all facets of education, tenure is the biggest thing grinding my gears.

[Ksandra]

I am not multiquoting on my phone, but in summary;

Show me where I said you think the committee exists. You laughed at me saying I think it exists, which is hella dumb and I was explaining that I am well aware that my plans aren't read that way.

I want them to look at the plans AND the students' quizzes/test/projects/etc.. This will give them a picture of what you are teaching and whether the students are actually learning it. These materials already exist so it means no extra work on the good teachers. Who gives a shit if the students think you are a bad teacher. Not sure why you brought that up. They can't write "bad teacher" on the test either. But looking at their actual quizzes (et al.) their teachers create will give a more accurate picture of the teacher's abilities.


Tests do not test with a brain. It would end up rewarding teachers who have honors classes and punishing those who don't. It will punish those who teach ESL classes, and reward those who don't. It's too unified.

[Ksandra]

Salodin, how do you expect non tested subject teachers (art, history, pe, etc.) to get a bonus? Fuck them because hey they didn't get to state test their kids?

[Aksannyi]

If the child is a bad test taker, then take the time to fix that.

I'm still hung up on this, to be honest. Being a good test taker isn't going to help that kid in college, nor is it going to help them on their job. It's literally only useful for doing well in school. I'm not going into teaching so that I can show kids how to do well on tests that will mean fuckall when they grow up and go into society. Teaching kids how to take tests and teaching to the test literally defeats the entire purpose of education. The kids aren't learning things they need to know or should know, because they're learning shit like "test taking skills." We shouldn't be spending more time teaching to standardized tests.

I'm not as experienced as Ksandra but I do know several things from the experiences I've had in classrooms so far. One of them is that you cannot reach every kid, you can try your best to do so, but at the end of the day, you're gonna have kids who don't give a fuck. You're going to have kids who do give a fuck but just can't keep up due to SLD or something else. You're going to have kids who don't understand enough English to be successful on grade-level exams. Yes, these kids are given extra attention so they can catch up, but you cannot reasonably hope that every child everywhere is going to achieve, and you can't put it on teachers to reach every child they ever teach. Statistically, it's not possible. Grading teachers based on how their kids do, some of whom will fall into the categories I've just mentioned, isn't always fair, because despite our best efforts, sometimes kids still fail.

[BerenTebogo]

Being a good test taker is sort of a misnomer.

People aren't "good at taking tests" independent of other factors. It tends to indicate better study habits and memory access/retention skills, which ARE incredibly useful for life.

So you should be encouraging kids to be good test takers.

The converse is not true in the same way as people can be bad test takers due to anxiety and stuff, not just study habits. But if you have anxiety / time management skills that impair your ability to test well they will also impair your ability to perform at a job.

So you should encourage kids to improve their testing weaknesses.

[Aksannyi]

Fair point.

I just get tired of the argument that "Your kids are doing bad at tests? Teach MORE TO THE TEST! Duh!" I'd rather teach to skills that they'll need (which the Common Core State Standards address pretty well, in my opinion) which will in turn improve their test scores. Perhaps that's essentially the same thing, but I feel like the kids will be more open to learning when it's not "This will be on your FSAs" than "This is a skill that will help you in the future."

I'm not here for people making the tests so "do or die" for students and teachers that they become the only focus. Especially when you consider other factors (as the ones in my previous post) that tests can't adequately account for. Sure, there's AYP and some people do look at the fact that a student who was barely speaking English when he got to your room is now producing sentences, but it doesn't feel like enough. Some people are only looking at hard numbers, and it's impossible to quantify what happens in a classroom with hard numbers. Especially on one single test rather than a collective.

[Salodin]

Let's go in order:

Ksandra, I never said you think your committee exists. I'm commenting on the idea of your committee doing the things you want them to do. We're discussing your solution, not debating whether your hypothetical already exists. If I said otherwise, which I don't think I did, I apologize, but by now I've made it abundantly clear that's not what I think. I explained before the problem with your solution, that is you're expecting to critique a teacher based on the results the teachers give the supervisors that the very same teacher evaluated. You're literally saying "grade me based on the grades I give my students". You counter this by saying they can see your lesson plans, but that means nothing when having a plan does nothing if you can't work the plan.

I concur, no one cares if the students think you're a bad teacher, but what about their parents? Your principal? Your superintendent? Your idea is to have them evaluate you based on tests you administer and grade. You're against standardized testing, but are for your testing? You are proposing what is the equivalent of what we have now, except -you- set the rubric and not the state. That's not how a job works, and is a system better suited for home schools (after which your student will have to take a standardized test any ways to prove they are at the level they are supposed to be lol).

You are spot on when you say looking at quizzes, etc, create a more accurate picture of a teachers abilities, more so then standardized tests, but that's not the point of a standardized test. It's a focus sure, even though it shouldn't be as much as it is now. These tests influencing your evaluation is more of a by product of the point of the test, that is to make sure students are at the level they need to be before promotion.

Yes, basing bonuses strictly on that is unfair when you consider gifted classes, esl, etc, but I did already mention the system needs to be modified any ways. These special kids also have their own rubric as it is now, either a plan to get them on track before moving them to the standard or for where they should be to stay ahead like they are now. I shouldn't have to say you don't grade gifted kids or special needs with the same rubric you do the rest of the grade, that's illogical.

Are art teachers paid as much as a normal teacher? Legitimate question, I assumed they weren't. Same for any kind of specials teacher. If you believe they require incentives, then I'd be open to discussing what those would be. I'm not completely convinced they need it though.

Aks, I know this isn't the answer you want, but a student being bad at tests falls under "too bad so sad". It's unfortunate for the child, but it's not like it keeps them from promotion either. I disagree as well when you say being a good test taker won't get them into college; it absolutely will. You don't think having the critical thinking skills to solve a problem won't be reflected in test scores? Obviously they affect the grades the teacher gives, why wouldn't it affect the grades the student gets on a standardized test? Also, the bar for promotion is set so low when it's reliant on the standardized tests for the very reason that you're concerned. You can be bad at tests, but even then if you know the subject you're never so bad that you get left behind.

You're stuck on the concept that having a standardized test means we have to teach the test, which I already mentioned is terrible, so I don't know where you're coming from. The point I've consistently made isn't to teach to the test, it's to use the test as a tool to evaluate not just the students level, but to take that information and infer a teachers teaching ability. How we do so needs work, but I'm not of the idea that they need to be abolished.

[zoobernut]

Salodin, how do you expect non tested subject teachers (art, history, pe, etc.) to get a bonus? Fuck them because hey they didn't get to state test their kids?

Since when was history and pe non tested subjects? When I was a kid those were definitely tested and art doesn't matter anymore since Art and Music have been cut as they were deemed unnecessary. (I am being sarcastic here as I personally believe art, music, and pe to be some of the most essential subjects to help kids become well rounded balanced individuals)

But seriously when did they stop testing history?

I agree too that performance based on test scores for teachers is the dumbest idea for education it doesn't do anything to encourage teachers to become better teachers and it doesn't measure how well a teacher is doing at their job.

Edit: With respect to the test thing that conversation has a huge dependence on what type of test is being given and how the test is structured. Some people are amazing at lab practicums but fail a written exam and the other way around too. Just because someone isn't good at taking tests does not indicate anything about how they will function as an adult. You would need to go way deeper into why they are having a hard time taking certain types of tests.

[Aksannyi]

History is still tested but it's not on standardized tests.

[zoobernut]

History is still tested but it's not on standardized tests.

That clarifies that. Thanks.

[Salodin]

I think PE testing is done more in high school than elementary.

[Melena]

I think PE testing is done more in high school than elementary.

It may have changed, but I remember in middle school having to do the presidential fitness bullshit twice a year.

[archibaldcrane]

You sound mad about it chubby.

[Melena]

You sound mad about it chubby.

I excelled at situps, but hated running and never had any upper body strength. I'm happy that 18 years after graduating high school i'm only 35 pounds heavier than I was when I graduated, and i was in pretty decent shape then. I would have rather just been playing baseball or football instead of standing around watching people do pullups and crap till it was your turn.

[zoobernut]

It may have changed, but I remember in middle school having to do the presidential fitness bullshit twice a year.

Yeah when I was a kid PE testing started in middle school.