My Friend Is a Teacher, And The Boss Sucks! Advice?

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I know. What I would like to see explored is a revamping of the system to allow kids to have the breaks they need, but teachers and schools are used on a full-time basis. Teachers would get a similar holiday schedule as every other public-sector employeee in Canada, and schools would be used 12 months/year.

That's an excellent idea. Let's take a career with huge amount of people leaving because of stress or being able to make more money in the private sector (good luck finding a teacher below the age of 50 to teach Industrial Artts), where a frighteningly large number of people leave the profession after five years (so not enough people to replace the older teachers nearing retirement) and make it even more difficult than it already is.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by GGG

1) I personally don't like stadardized testing as you get the teach to the test problem but both you and I know that we had good teachers and bad teachers and they were easy to tell apart. So I think subjective evaluation by supervisors, peer reviews, and reviews by students would play a role the same as any other job evaluates their employees. For example I am reviewed by my project manager, the client, and the people I supervise.

2) So what???? Does this mean we shouldn't apply any private sector management concepts to the delivery of education. In fact if we fail at education the consequences are worth. A buisness with a poor employee becomes less efficient and less profitable. A poor teacher reduces the final educational potential of an individual.

Currently the union framework does reward good teachers and makes it very difficult to remove poor teachers even though there is not of shortage of teachers trying to break into the industry.

In theory I agree with you, but in practice I don't think it's very easy to evaluate a teacher, primarily because teachers work mainly with students, not their peers. You could have students evaluate teachers, but they'd probably base their evaluation more on how 'fun' a teacher is, not how well they teach. You could base it on standardized test results, but while a teacher has some effect, results are more related to the student's abilities - no one would want to teach at schools in the northeast if their salaries depended on standardized tests.

Administrators (principals etc.) generally have some idea about who are the good vs. bad teachers in a school though, and it would be nice if there was a mechanism in place for at least some part of the salary being affected by an evaluation by the principal and vice- or assistant-principal.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

In theory I agree with you, but in practice I don't think it's very easy to evaluate a teacher, primarily because teachers work mainly with students, not their peers. You could have students evaluate teachers, but they'd probably base their evaluation more on how 'fun' a teacher is, not how well they teach. You could base it on standardized test results, but while a teacher has some effect, results are more related to the student's abilities - no one would want to teach at schools in the northeast if their salaries depended on standardized tests.

Administrators (principals etc.) generally have some idea about who are the good vs. bad teachers in a school though, and it would be nice if there was a mechanism in place for at least some part of the salary being affected by an evaluation by the principal and vice- or assistant-principal.

For a good example of this, head over to ratemyteachers.ca.

A colleague of mine got a poor rating by one student because she sent him/her to the office "for no reason".

Despite the fact that the teacher taught this student for a whole semester, the students chose to bank his/her rating, not on teaching abilities, but rather on one discipline issue.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by GGG

1) I personally don't like stadardized testing as you get the teach to the test problem but both you and I know that we had good teachers and bad teachers and they were easy to tell apart. So I think subjective evaluation by supervisors, peer reviews, and reviews by students would play a role the same as any other job evaluates their employees. For example I am reviewed by my project manager, the client, and the people I supervise.

2) So what???? Does this mean we shouldn't apply any private sector management concepts to the delivery of education. In fact if we fail at education the consequences are worth. A buisness with a poor employee becomes less efficient and less profitable. A poor teacher reduces the final educational potential of an individual.

Currently the union framework does reward good teachers and makes it very difficult to remove poor teachers even though there is not of shortage of teachers trying to break into the industry.

There's good and bad employees in every profession. Teaching is no different, and I doubt there is a higher proportion of crappy teachers in schools compared to other professions.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by bcb

There's good and bad employees in every profession. Teaching is no different, and I doubt there is a higher proportion of crappy teachers in schools compared to other professions.

Completely agree with but in other professions the top people move up and get raises and the poor employees don't and are the first to go in recessions.

What incentive is their for a teacher to perform? I am not a teacher so I really don't know.

If you were going to do performance based on standardized tests you would use the the amount of improvement a kid would have from year to year. So if you are teaching Grade English and your class is stupid (for lack of better word) and is reading at a grade 6.5 and at the end of year they got to a 7.5 you would have done your job.

Its in either Freakanomics or one of Gladwells books where they talk about how good teachers are able to get 1.5 years of development out of a class and poor teachers get .5 years of development. There has to be a way to measure and reward the teachers who successfully educate their students.

As you said before it is our future.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by GGG

Completely agree with but in other professions the top people move up and get raises and the poor employees don't and are the first to go in recessions.

What incentive is their for a teacher to perform? I am not a teacher so I really don't know.

If you were going to do performance based on standardized tests you would use the the amount of improvement a kid would have from year to year. So if you are teaching Grade English and your class is stupid (for lack of better word) and is reading at a grade 6.5 and at the end of year they got to a 7.5 you would have done your job.

Its in either Freakanomics or one of Gladwells books where they talk about how good teachers are able to get 1.5 years of development out of a class and poor teachers get .5 years of development. There has to be a way to measure and reward the teachers who successfully educate their students.

As you said before it is our future.

Today's kids, especially in a large city, are not a homogeneous bunch. Using your model, you don't account for character development, or any development not captured by a standardized test.

If it helps, most of the poor teachers weed themselves out of the profession within the first 5 years.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by bcb

Today's kids, especially in a large city, are not a homogeneous bunch. Using your model, you don't account for character development, or any development not captured by a standardized test.

If it helps, most of the poor teachers weed themselves out of the profession within the first 5 years.

Personally I think the biggest obstacle to assessing teachers' performance is their union.

Yes, many of the poor teachers do weed themselves out but some are also protected by their union. It is very very hard to dismiss a poor teacher once they have achieved tenure. Quite often, the problem teacher in one school is simply passed on to another school.

And to counteract that, especially during times of recession or cutbacks to education, school boards simply do not grant tenure, choosing instead to hire teachers on temporary contracts.

And in the long term, that is not good for education either because if good teachers are only offered temporary contracts, after awhile, they too will move on.

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by GGG

What incentive is their for a teacher to perform? I am not a teacher so I really don't know.

I'm normally very sensitive about this question (maybe too sensitive?) but I read your question as an honest one and not a swipe, so I'll try my best to stay calm .

The incentive for me is many-fold:

- the incentive to do well at my job and earn my paycheque
- wanting specifically to see my students do well and succeed because I care for them
- the broader benefit we get as a society from educated young men and women (though I admit - this is not something I consciously think of each day - "I have to teach this lesson well to benefit society as a whole")
- because it is literally easier on a day-to-day basis with behaviors and all other issues if you teach well (kids want to learn)

Sure, I don't get the benefit of a yearly bonus or a direct path to promotion by doing well at my job but the incentives to do well are there - they are just different from those that people encounter at other jobs.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by GGG

Completely agree with but in other professions the top people move up and get raises and the poor employees don't and are the first to go in recessions.

You must not actually work, because this is totally not true.