Posted on 03/15/2006 4:37:57 AM PST by summer
All I can tell you is what my daughters friends tell me. Their teachers basically hand them informational packets, kind of like SAT prep packets and just do those for weeks and months at a time.
But if nobody knows exactly what is on the test this year you just have to cover everything. (Truth be told I knew there was no advanced material in the SAT.)
Nothing is perfect but it's far better then not testing.
If the teachers see the tests first this will be a big problem. If on the other hand the teachers know the students will need to solve a quadratic and wright a thesis paragraph I'm fine with it.
Teaching to a good test is just teaching.
Hmmm. What kind of information do they learn from these packets? I'm guessing it would have to be the subject content?
Life is not a textbook (and thank goodness I've never seen a horse is to saddle as ox is to _______ question in my adulthood experience) and I prefer that my kids learn to think outside of the box so that one day hopefully they can solve complex problems. But hey, that's just me. If you think it's a good idea to do test packets all day that's fine with me. That's why I support educational choice in this country.
No, but if you read the article, their solution provides for that. Teachers of non-core subjects are judged by the school board for performance. I have no problem with that either. They are then accountable to people elected to run the school district.
I guess this makes teaching really easy, just follow the leasson plan that the testmakers will map out and you've put yourself into the fast track for teacher of the year.
Nope, it isn't easy. If it was, the ineffective tenured teachers currently pervading the system would do just fine. For my hard-earned tax dollars, I want teachers who can actually teach. I want the rest to have a fire lit under their lazy butts to start producing -- teaching their students effectively -- or find another line of work.
Dedicated, results-oriented teachers have nothing to fear from such a system, tenured or not. And that's the real point: changing the system from an incentive for simple longevity to an incentive for results. Without that incentive, the results will always suffer.
Call me a skeptic, but I have difficulty envisioning good teaching (or anything good) as the outcome of this program. I see kids with personalities like mine skipping class and going to McDonalds when that teacher concerned about how well we master quadratics goes through it for the 700th time in order to get that pay raise. Some see it as measuring success, I see it as a guarantee for marginalized teaching methods and removing the motivation for good teachers to expand their lesson plan beyond the "standard". As the previous poster mentioned, every good teacher I had helped expand the material to practical, real word applications. Its one thing to spit back an answer to a cross multiplication question, but can you use that skill to find how many more hits you'll need to bat .350 in a game? I try to imagine what it would be like if those same teachers who helped me develop that type of thinking would have instead abandon their effort in order to make sure I could score 2 more questions correctly on the test. Abstract thinking and life skill thinking aren't in lesson plans, but good teachers help students develop those skills. I don't know if that is something you can easily measure, but you realize later on in life that it made the difference between true retention and use-for-the-test-and-forget learning.
Teachers with a lot of years in the system are not doing so badly -- some NY teachers, with 20 years in, now make over $100K per year. And, they don't need any 2nd job at ther GAP. They probably don't care too much about a $2,000 bonus, either. But for new teachers making $25,000 in some places (and, yes, some teachers are still paid that little). they are having a tough time.
Re your post #20 - There are school districts in FL that have bought huge district office buildings, only to rent them out later, not kinowing what to do with all the space. In the district where I reside, there is marble flooring and countertops in the admin center, while teachers are still teaching in portables. And that's not the state's fault -- that's the fault of stupid adminiistrators whose priorities do not include teachers and kids as being the most imporant elements in a school system. But don't worry, those adminiistrators are already making their 6-figure salaries, so they need all the extra comfort they can get in their office space. And what do these people do? No one knows. The teachers only know they never see these people in the schools.
Re your post #21 - I agree with your entire post. Thanks for your thoughtful comments.
RE your post 312 - My pleasure and thanks for your comments here, SoftballMominVa. :)
Re your post #22 - Very good idea. And, that would save teachers a ton of money.
Re your post #23 - Well, how about this true scenario: a teacher agrees to be the supervisor for a student teacher. The student teacher is in her 3rd internship, which means she is responsible for everything that happens in that classroom for a semester. The next semester, the FCATS are given and the students score skky high, thanks to the innovative, hard-working student teacher who busted her *ss 24 hours a day for a semester. Now, who gets the $2,000 bonus? The older teacher who did nothing for a semester -- not the student teacher, who had to give up her paying job to take this final, required student internship to graduate. Is that fair?
PS BTW, here's what the student teacher earned that semester: $0. Nothing.
I don't think every teacher's life is "cake and ice cream" though you might find some in that category.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.