The PEBC Network
Click to PEBC.org
Click to EdNewsColorado.org
Click to Boettcherteachers.org
Click to Education Research and Practice

Author Archive

What students need from teachers

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

Every now and then I hear a teacher say something or read something a teacher has produced and it sends a chill down my spine. While I was reviewing other schools’ AP recommendation processes (I am our school’s AP Coordinator) I came across some statements on some course descriptions that are truly reflective of teaching stuck in the past.

For an AP English Literature course I read “that it is difficult to earn an ‘A.’” This seemed to be stated as a source of pride. Does this teacher take pride in this “fact?” If so, why are they teaching? Yes, AP courses are difficult, but it is the responsibility of the teacher to get the students to where they need to be. Any expectation less than an “A” for all students is just wrong.

“No late papers, work accepted.” Really? Why? Don’t some students take longer to learn than others? I cannot think of a time in my undergraduate work or my graduate work that a professor denied me more time, unless it was an end of the semester project. Isn’t an AP course supposed to reflect a college level course at the high school level?

Of all the statements I read the following was the most disappointing: “Students take responsibility for learning, but I am always willing to meet with students outside of class for help or to look at drafts ahead of time.” So what is the teacher responsible for? Is the only variable in the classroom the student, not the teacher? Is the only job of the teacher to disseminate information to the student and then let the student know if they got it? I actually heard a teacher say this.

Students do not come to teachers to be sized up and sorted into those who can and those who cannot. They come to teachers to learn.

Popularity: 25% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

How not to cut teachers

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

My district is facing huge budget cuts for next year. $24 million in cuts to be exact. Since our district is like most, where more than 70% of the budget goes to personnel, we are talking lots of jobs here.

Tough decisions will be made in the next few months. Decisions about which teachers will lose their jobs are based on our Master Agreement. Usually, non-tenured teachers are the first to go. Then, if you have all tenured teachers, you go to a special appendix in the agreement.

Here there are various formulas that you apply to teachers after which you assign points for each tenured teacher; low points=lost job. Points are given for years of service; you receive points for your level of education; and more points are awarded for extra-curricular activities that a teacher may sponsor, like hip-hop club. What would you award points for?

Does it matter? We are going to cut support personnel from the classroom. We will increase class size. Increase the duties that teachers will have to perform as in hall duty and so on. All of this will require the best teachers possible in the classroom. Yet, we won’t make our decisions as to who these teachers are based on their ability to handle the increased work-load. We will use longevity and levels of education to decide which teachers stay.

Perhaps our dire economic and budget situation will force to rethink how we assess teachers.

Popularity: 37% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Overcoming the “yeah, but” syndrome

Monday, February 1st, 2010

One of my purposes for writing this blog has been to encourage or provoke educators to view their profession differently. As we struggle to reform our K-12 system, teachers have been comfortable  dealing with new challenges through their traditional reactionary approach. It is the “yeah, but” syndrome. “Yeah, you could use student achievement to evaluate my performance, but teachers can only control what goes on in their classroom.” “Yeah, we should use standards based grades, but how is the community going to react?”

I’ve written in the past about how the community at large tends to see teaching as a “calling” versus a profession. I think the community will view teachers differently as soon as teachers view themselves differently. I have run across a passage in a book which I think articulates this concern quite well. The book is called Instructional Rounds in Education by City, Elmore, Fiarman, and Teitel.

In this particular juncture in the history of American education, it is controversial to argue that teaching is a profession that requires high levels of knowledge and skill and that, like any profession, teachers are required to continue to develop their knowledge and skill actively over the course of their careers. The nineteenth-century idea that teaching is relatively low-skill work that can be performed by anyone with a nodding familiarity with content and an affinity for children is alive and well in the policy discourse of the present reform period. Just the suggestion that teaching and school leadership require a deep knowledge of instructional practice and a grounding in professional protocols for bringing knowledge into practice is likely to incite raised eyebrows on the part of many critics of American education. Presently, policy makers and critics lack much understanding of the actual knowledge and skill requirements of what they are asking educators to do. Educators are relatively powerless in this discussion because they are, as a group, active co-conspirators in the trivialization of educational expertise . School organization and culture, for the most part, do not exemplify a professional work environment as the broader society understands it.

This passage captures why I am so motivated to move teachers from their traditional reactionary position. One way to do this is to lead the discussion on how to evaluate teachers. Teachers need to hear and respond to the clamor for reform, especially in the way we view our profession.

Popularity: 16% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Teachers, let’s tend to our profession

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

It is time for teachers to tend to their profession. It is time for teachers to lead the discussion over teacher evaluation. It is time for teachers to articulate the standards by which they should be held accountable.

This call to action is pertinent (look at the current submissions for R2T funds) and it is long overdue. The New York Times published an editorial last Sunday that rightfully challenged current teacher evaluations.

The shortcomings of evaluations were laid out last year in an eye-opening study by a New York research group, the New Teacher Project. Where they can be said to exist at all, evaluations are typically short, pro forma and almost universally positive. Poorly trained evaluators visit the classroom once or twice for observations that last for a total of an hour or less. Nearly every teacher passes and the overwhelming majority of teachers receive top ratings.

Yet more than half the teachers surveyed said they knew a tenured teacher who deserved to be dismissed for poor performance.

The last sentence hit me hard. Why would we (teachers) let this happen? Teachers know what good teaching looks like. We have to use this knowledge to move our profession from the teaching model of thirty years ago—the “do no harm” approach—to a model that ensures that all students can reach academic standards. If a call to professionalism doesn’t motivate you then perhaps the concern that all of this will be done with or without our assistance should.

Popularity: 39% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Focus on the learning, not the teaching

Monday, January 11th, 2010

The current edition of the Atlantic Monthly Magazine has a fascinating article titled “What Makes a Great Teacher.” Based on data gathered by Teach for America and its 7,300 teachers, TFA has produced qualities it proposes are key to look for in potential teachers.

What Teach for America did differently was to look at the learning taking place in the classroom rather than the the teaching. While some might see this as a semantic sleight of hand, it reflects a necessary change in the evaluation of teachers. No more evaluation of teachers by administrators with a checklist on a clipboard. Are the learning objectives posted? Does the teacher address both sides of the class? Is the teacher in control of the class?

None of these questions get to the learning. What does get to the learning data? In part, student achievement data does. Yes, assessment data should be used in the process of teacher evaluation. But I do not want you to get bogged down in this hot topic for educators. Take a look at the article and the video segments.

Popularity: 6% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Arguments against merit pay

Monday, December 21st, 2009

“Is Merit Pay the Secret Sauce for Improving Teaching and Learning?” This article, written by Kim Marshall in Education Week, captures what I think are the key problems with merit pay.

1. Merit pay would stifle collaboration. For me this is the most important weakness with merit pay. If teachers are rewarded for their students’ performance, as compared to other teachers, this would negate the expressed incentive of pay for performance. Why would I want to share my successes with colleagues if it would undermine my pay?
2. There is no evidence that extra pay will make the best teachers work even harder or that it will improve mediocre teachers to work harder.
3. Standardized tests are instructionally insensitive and they focus on the wrong aspects of learning. If these are used to assess teachers, their use will become even more rampant.
4. Raising the stakes on tests encourages cheating.
5. Academically strong schools increase the amount of resources for struggling students. For example some students are pulled out of regular classrooms for additional reading instruction. Struggling students are identified and placed into intervention programs for additional time and support. How do you decide who gets the merit pay?
6. Good scores in 4th grade might be a result of the strong instruction of the 2nd or 3rd grade teacher? Don’t they deserve some of the pay?

Some ideas to deal with these shortcomings? How about rewarding entire staffs instead of individual teachers? This would encourage in-school collaboration and it would recognize the “It takes a village” approach to education and learning. Marshall also recommends salary increments to “master” teachers who mentor colleagues and serve as curriculum planners.

The bottom line according to Marshall is to “emulate the supervision and assessment approaches of our most effective schools and steer clear of the ineffective strategy of individual merit pay.”

Popularity: 22% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

In the community, time to work on healing

Monday, December 7th, 2009

I got into a heated discussion with some close friends of mine over the weekend. We were at a party for my wife’s birthday, when the Lake Middle School/school board meeting came up.

The discussion ended poorly and I felt bad that we had ended the discussion curtly and abruptly. We’ve communicated since then and all is well. My friends and I share common beliefs and values, we just happened to disagree. Friends can do this—they can hug and move on, knowing that they still share and value their friendship.

What about communities who have been fractured by disagreements? They can’t shake hands and move on unless they make a concerted effort to do so. The school board just ended its“counseling” therapy session. It’s important for them to work together; after all they are the ones who make the decisions—but what about the community? The school board is divided because the community is divided.

We have some work to do–some hard conversations to take place. I’d like to see someone who is well respected by the entire community come in and facilitate a series of conversations in the community about the direction of our schools and how that process can be better structured.

I’ve also learned a thing or two about the power of blogging. What I have recently learned is that while blogging can put ideas out there, blogging cannot take the place of good, honest, face-to-face dialogue. Let’s remember the power and limits of blogging as “conversation.”

Popularity: 16% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Reframing the DPS mess

Thursday, December 3rd, 2009

I too grew up in Chicago during the Richard J. Daley Administration. I saw many a political maneuver used by those who were fighting the Boss’s Machine.

They were fighting because they were marginalized and disenfranchised from city politics. They used these ploys as a way to bring attention to their plight.

I am not comparing the machine politics of Chicago to the Denver school board. I am trying to reframe the issue with the recent school board hearing and Lake Middle School voting, from one that focuses on the intended results from the political maneuver to what I see as the more important issue: a lack of community voice in the reform movement in Denver.

Let’s use the recent events not as a moment to cry foul, but to look at the reason why people felt that they had to prematurely remove Michelle Moss from her seat. The issue is access to the process.

DPS knows it has work to do in bringing the community into the various conversations about reform. But what concerns me is that there is no formalized effort to monitor or set benchmarks to ensure that the community is involved.

DPS has established the Office of Community Engagement. Good step in the right direction. That Moss was unceremoniously removed from her seat should not cloud the real failure here. It truly was a failure to constructively engage the community.

Popularity: 36% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Charters as teaching tools

Monday, November 30th, 2009

Call me a dreamer but isn’t this the way it is supposed to work?

A Rhode Island charter school and the district within which it operates are collaborating on what works in the charter classroom. The charter was showing strong growth in reading progress with its students. The superintendent, Frances Gallo, went to the class to ask why.

“When I visited, I saw kids who, by lottery, had hit paradise,” Gallo said. “I kept asking, ‘What is it?’ They have the same demographics as us. Their parents are our parents. They don’t turn away special-education students.”

Gallo figured out that the charter had hit upon a successful approach to teaching reading. Gallo started a pilot program whereby the charter school teachers worked closely with teachers from two other elementary schools to teach them their successful strategies. The results are impressive.

I continue to resist the idea that charters are simply about choice. Charters are no better or worse that non-charter public schools. If this is the case what is the purpose for charters? I cling to one of the original intentions of the charter movement—that the diversity of charters might allow for successful strategies to be identified and then used in non-charter public schools. This Rhode Island School District has nailed this approach down and had great success.

This brings me to the Lake Middle School debacle. What is it that West Denver Prep does so well? Why can’t these strategies be taught to other schools? Can the charter teach the non-charter public schools some of their successful strategies? Is the system of charters set up for this to happen, or would it be self-defeating for the charters? Would it drive them out of business?

Popularity: 7% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark

Superintendents fire shot across teachers’ bow

Friday, November 20th, 2009

The race to the Race to the Top Funds have taken on a new purpose these days. Some are using the money grab as a means to push political agendas. Take the Denver Area Superintendents Council (DASSC) for instance.

In a letter, dated October 29th, to Colorado Lieutenant Governor O’Brien and Commissioner Jones,  DASSC has proposed some major changes to the Teacher Dismissal Act, which  DASSC apparently believes would act as bait for the funds.

The council calls for radical changes to the teacher probationary time period, from three to seven years; and for non-probationary teachers to have their status subject to renewal every five years. Here are other proposed changes, as outlined in the letter:

  • All superintendents in DASSC want teachers protected from arbitrary decisions and capricious behavior on the part of any school administrator. However, the Teacher Dismissal Act has created an unworkable, complex, drawn out process for dismissal of any licensed teacher whose performance is not satisfactory. We would advocate the Teacher Dismissal Act be reviewed and revised so that the following could be accomplished.
  • The burden of proof at contested dismissal hearing for performance based issues should be shifted from the school district to the individual teacher. The teacher should have to prove arbitrary or capricious behavior on behalf of the school district. The use of the arbitrary and capricious standard should recognize that school administrators should have considerable discretion and judgment about whether a teacher is performing his or her job in a satisfactory manner. We also believe that the losing party should pay hearing related expenses.
  • While maintaining protection, the protracted process should be simplified and shortened. Teachers should not have 100 days of pay while the case is moving forward from the grievance process through a hearing in front of an administrative law judge unless the teacher wins the hearing in question and is reinstated. Otherwise, we would advocate that paying teachers ends when the district moves forward for dismissal.

It is interesting that  DASSC uses the banner of “teacher effectiveness” to support its position. Nowhere does the council elaborate on how to get more “effectiveness” out of teachers. Instead the focus is on the punitive side of teacher evaluations. Also not mentioned in the letter is the important role that administrative supervisors play.

So, is this just posturing on the part of the DASSC? Or is this a true representation of the direction that the Denver area superintendents will take in upcoming negotiations? I know many will take the letter as a shot across the bow of teachers.

I would like to see teachers associations take this shot across the bow as a clarion call for teachers to engage in restructuring the evaluation process. In particular I think peer assistance and peer review evaluation need to become part of the master agreement.

Let the superintendents grumble about “restrictive” and “complex” barriers to firing teachers. Let’s tend to the profession and lead the way to a more effective and complete evaluation process.

For those teachers interested in seeing the actual letter, see your association rep. They should have a copy. My understanding is that local associations are going to have conversations with their superintendents to see if the letter reflects their views. The CEA has responded to the letter. Email them if you’d like to see their response.

Popularity: 19% [?]

  • Share/Bookmark
Daniels fundColorado League of Charter SchoolsColorado Childrens CampaignCollege InvestPitton FoundationsDonnell-Kay Foundation