This is a no-brainer. **OBVIOUSLY** the poorest performers SHOULD be gone first, but that's not the way it works and just watch how NYSUT fights this one.
And John, maybe I didn't understand your comment, but if you think that all poor performing teachers are gone before they're granted tenure, I've got some swamp land to sell you.
I agree with poor performance, but ...
poor performance should be weeded out before tenure.
What about if someone just isn't liked by administration?
They could be perfectly good instructors, but could be gotten rid of on trumped up charges.
Schools are very political. It happens.
I guess there is no easy answer for this.
Which ever teacher has the lowest cummulative GPA in their subject over the last 3 years (or less if they have been there less than 3 years) should be let go for every subject in H.S. and Middle School. Elementary Teachers same thing but lowest GPA for the grade level.
That will cut plenty. Then you can bring in interns to be classroom monitors for the larger class sizes to work along side the teachers. If there aren't enough interns, then find some stay at home moms who have school age kids that would like to do something other than dishes and laundry during the day and hire them for the fraction of the cost of the teachers. They won't need benefits, and maybe $10 an hour. Don't give them power just have them report to the teachers what is happening in the class.
If those moms have some expertise, let them help the students.
It saves money, improves the school, and decreases faculty/student ratio.
Dave,
I know bad ones are kept. And that is part of why I think relatives of Board members should not be allowed to be hired while the Board member is serving.
What if a Board members relative is a poor performer. Who is going to do anything about it, the administration? The administrator's pay is determined by the Board, so I don't think they will do it.
Tenure and nepotism are a problem. I hope that lady who ran for the Board the last time does so again.
Peter, the problem with your argument (other than the comments about housewives and dishes) is that it completely disregards how a school actually works.
What if the teacher with the lowest cumulative GPA for the last three years has been teaching co-taught or blended classes? Do they count? Or on the opposite end, what to do with the teacher who is teaching honors classes. Do they get to keep their jobs automatically? That hardly seems fair considering the disparity in student achievement levels that would be a given in those subjects. In many high schools, teachers will teach several different grade levels and instructional levels each year.
And theoretically, shouldn't the social studies teacher who is teaching US History in 11th grade have an advantage over the Global Studies teachers who teach 9th and 10th, given that most schools teach American history in 8th as well which should provide the students with more background?
And what about science and math? Are we comparing everyone in the entire department? Or do we break it down by area. As a general rule, Physics and calculus are much more difficult than Earth Science and Integrated Algebra, so you would think their scores would be lower. But students in NYS only have to take three years of science and math for graduation credit, so the students who take those courses tend to be the stronger academic students with a real interest in the material. Is it fair to compare them now?
Ultimately, it's a really difficult question because the answer SEEMS so obvious, but the reality is convoluted.
They are competing only in their expertise. 11th Us History vs 11th US History. Biology vs Biology. Math IV vs Math IV
As for special ed, that is excluded from my argument and I currently don't know how to include it.
For Honors, the students (when I was in hs) got an extra .5 added to their GPA for their grade in that class so it is already weighted to be even. This allowed those students to compete with the bright kids in the normal classes for Valedictorian.
I don't know about out here, but in Spencerport where I went, teachers taught one subject in HS and middle school.
Occasionally teachers moved around in grade level. (Twice I had a previous teacher, once in 7th and 8th I had the same English teacher and 9th and 11th the same Math) But you just treat them as separate employment periods. Take where they are now with the latest data. Treat as a new employ at that level. So a 20 year teacher that just moved to 12th grade P.I.G. last year has this year and last years grade to count nothing before that.
Interesting how we have had a few days of blogging and there seems to be a lot of animosity from some individuals towards teachers. I really don't think everybody has their facts straight.
To start, tenure is not the iron clad defense of bad teachers as people believe. Teachers who truely are performing poorly can be removed. I also do not believe we have as many poorly performing teachers in our area as people think. I would like to know what people feel makes a poor teacher. If administration does their job, the few teachers that are there only for the pay and don't work hard for the kids will be weeded out early on at no cost to the district. Tenure is to protect good teachers from being replaced halfway through their career because an administrator has a grudge, and they do, or nepotism to create a job for family/ friend.
This brings me to my second point. You cannot just look at numbers. All classrooms are not created equal. There are special ed classes where they are just hoping to make some progress, there are inclusion rooms where there are general ed kids mixed with special ed., this obviously will keep overall averages down, then there are accelerated classrooms where averages are superb with minimal effort. Not to mention behavior issues, low motivation/ family support and the multitude of other factors that go into day to day instruction. Looking at just the numbers is not a good way to evaluate teachers. Also what about art teachers, gym, music library instructors... no state test for them, how is that fair?
To many people making negative comments have class envy. If you think teachers have it so good, go back to college spend 6 years getting a degree, prove yourself in rigorous interviews, get scrutinized for three years to earn tenure, get ridiculed constantly by the community you work so hard for, deal with all the day to day challenges in the classroom, push your students to pass the numerous state exams, deal with parents who don't give a crap, ... I think you get the point!
Don't make ignorant comments unless you are willing to walk a mile in their shoes.
I don't know things are now in Spencerport, but I taught English for ten years at Pittsford Mendon. During those ten years the fewest number of different classes I taught in a given year was three. The most I taught was six. I taught every single grade level during those ten years.
Even having them compete within a grade level doesn't always work though (although having it done over a period of years would help). And then, you are talking about cutting some departments in half or more.
There were times that the students in a class that I taught (we'll use English 11 as an example), would be far weaker or stronger as a whole than a class another teacher was teaching. This might not have had anything to do with either teacher, but rather the building class schedule. If my classes happen to be the ones scheduled at the same time as honors classes for other disciplines, I may end up with a group of students who are a little weaker. Ask any high school counselor and they will tell you that the master schedule at a high school is a nightmare.
Keith,
I am just a guy on the outside using my own experience to come up with a semi equitable way to do it. And I don't know exactly how many jobs need to be cut to reach the savings that are needed. Obviously I have no input as to how its done. I'm not claiming to be all knowledgeable.
And I also understand grades don't reflect teaching ability. I scored C's and D's with my favorite teachers because I was lazy. I hated homework. I was told it was practice for the exams, but when I scored A's and high B's on the exams I came to the conclusion that "practice" wasn't necessary.
But I tried to eliminate as much bad data (like the data I provided my high school) with the averaging over years.
I think the system I mentioned gives equal balance to the power of years in service and to quality teaching as is mentioned in the poll.
I'm a bright guy but I'm not very educated. I am also certain other ways can be more equitable than mine.
As for the stay at home mom comment, I know they do more then dishes and laundry. It was not meant as an insult. I actually hope to be able to be a stay at home dad for my kids.
Mark,
I don't have a hatred for teachers. But I do think tenure is an obscure policy. Being part of the private sector, if I get a boss who doesn't like me and hurts or ends my career, I go and find another job. But more than likely in teaching if it was to happen, you'd finish the school year first. (Unless the administrator has no caring for the children you are trying to teach) And you would have your normally scheduled (and hopefully planned for) time off to find another job
I don't know when the metrics of educating children and filling tin cans with soup will become comparable, but I do not see it happening in the near future. Teachers (like any professional in the current economic climate) are well aware of the tenuous nature of employment. Most would be no less pleased to see any dead wood removed rather than suffer an arbitrary axe.
As noted, the educational system is not so simple that the under-informed can assign fool-proof fixes or evaluation criteria that comprehensively address perceived inadequacies.
Most classrooms are integrated- students of varied performance levels are blended with provisions for IEPs handled in special needs labs. With the exception of IP (honors) classes, any given classroom might have students ranging from Honor Society members to students with certified learning disabilities. Weighing the performance of a History teacher teaching IP Sociology and another History teacher with a blended class is apples to oranges.
The reality of the teaching field in terms of numbers in any given field, and which schools have the financial clout to hire the best candidate; leaves suburban schools with the advantage and rural/inner city schools somewhere else. If a school needs a physics or chemistry teacher, subject areas that are typically under-represented, the school can only choose from those candidates who apply. The school can't NOT offer physics because the applicants were all mediocre.
On the same token, even the most stellar teacher cannot avoid the realities of the bell curve- some children will perform well, others poorly and most, somewhere in between. A teacher with twenty students, one of whom has health issues that impact attendance, should not be penalized because absenteeism affected one child's GPA and tanked that teacher's performance score.
Ultimately, we are not discussing performance issues that can be tracked solely to the teacher. Oddly, since most of us have been through the public school system, it would seem that the variables would be more apparent.
Peter, I've posted on this very subject innumerable times. I don't know of any magic fix- if there is one. I believe that a four-year degree, a teaching certificate, a masters degree for permanent certification, a culture of peer review combined with perpetual in-service training and on-going immersion in new techniques, new technology and curriculum review/updating along with constant professional development is a pretty comprehensive approach.
Frankly, spending more money on evaluation than teacher salaries seems a backward approach.
John, I can pick my own skirmishes without your meddling.
There’s an ongoing healthy discussion on the requiring of a master’s degree for permanent certification. New York is one of only a handful of states that has such a requirement and the results, depending on one’s interpretation of the data, speak for themselves. At the very least, the available evidence suggests that the link between teachers needing a master's degree for permanent certification and being a better teacher is open to debate and not settled. For more info, see Hanushek, E.A. In press. The economic value of higher teacher quality. <I>Economics of Education Review</I> xx:xxx.
John, I picked the phrase 'under-informed' as the least provocative descriptor of anyone looking in at something he/she may not have a complete picture of. I don't think that the critics of public education are dumb or out of touch. I think most people who criticize education do so from a narrow perspective based on their own or second-hand experiences. I doubt many have the opportunity to be part of the hiring or firing process. I also doubt that most people have a complete understanding of professional development in public education process. Having worked in a public school for nearly thirty years, I can offer some broader scope to the discussion.
I agree with Howard. The best teachers have qualities that do not come from formal education. One has to put some confidence in the notion that MOST people who choose to be teachers have that quality and go through the necessary training to hone that passion and discover the tool kit for applying that passion.
Unfortunately, the passionate teacher has to bridge a slew of obstacles that distract them and their students from success. It is those factors that tend to be minimized in the pursuit of quantifying educational performance.
I applaud anyone who seeks to improve the quality of education in their community. The best way to do that is to get involved in the local school.
I resent high taxes as much as the next, but I don't think that austerity is a particularly effective motivator- primarily as the sole intervention.
If one considers the programs that usually get cut (art, music, drama, field trips, athletics) when the budget axe falls, one can envision most of the programs that maintain student interest.
I agree with Steve Hawley- it would serve all if the state mandates were suspended to allow local districts to maximize the diminished funds available to them.
I also think- contrary to the Wisconsin mess -that our new governor would be wise to meet with AFSCME, CSEA, NYSUT, PEF, SEIU and NEA and work out a strategy to mitigate salaries and layoffs.
Finally, I think the State Ed Dept would do well to head off any witch hunts by proposing a new administrative model that allows multiple schools to share some of the premium pay officials.
When in Middle school, the classes were made up in blocks, A block students were usually better than B block students, C block students were the slower learners. How on earth could you find a fair way to grade teachers if one teacher has all A block students while another has all C block students?
I have to agree with Richard, there are too many variables in the equation to measure teaching quality, and teacher performance. Seniority will be the criteria to determine who stays and who goes. Seniority rules in union shops, it is the first criteria when determining who gets laid off.
The poor ones should already
The poor ones should already be gone, that's the problem with tenure.
If the bad ones were already gone, then I think lay offs should be by seniority.
This is a no-brainer.
This is a no-brainer. **OBVIOUSLY** the poorest performers SHOULD be gone first, but that's not the way it works and just watch how NYSUT fights this one.
And John, maybe I didn't understand your comment, but if you think that all poor performing teachers are gone before they're granted tenure, I've got some swamp land to sell you.
I agree with poor
I agree with poor performance, but ...
poor performance should be weeded out before tenure.
What about if someone just isn't liked by administration?
They could be perfectly good instructors, but could be gotten rid of on trumped up charges.
Schools are very political. It happens.
I guess there is no easy answer for this.
Which ever teacher has the
Which ever teacher has the lowest cummulative GPA in their subject over the last 3 years (or less if they have been there less than 3 years) should be let go for every subject in H.S. and Middle School. Elementary Teachers same thing but lowest GPA for the grade level.
That will cut plenty. Then you can bring in interns to be classroom monitors for the larger class sizes to work along side the teachers. If there aren't enough interns, then find some stay at home moms who have school age kids that would like to do something other than dishes and laundry during the day and hire them for the fraction of the cost of the teachers. They won't need benefits, and maybe $10 an hour. Don't give them power just have them report to the teachers what is happening in the class.
If those moms have some expertise, let them help the students.
It saves money, improves the school, and decreases faculty/student ratio.
Dave, I know bad ones are
Dave,
I know bad ones are kept. And that is part of why I think relatives of Board members should not be allowed to be hired while the Board member is serving.
What if a Board members relative is a poor performer. Who is going to do anything about it, the administration? The administrator's pay is determined by the Board, so I don't think they will do it.
Tenure and nepotism are a problem. I hope that lady who ran for the Board the last time does so again.
Peter, the problem with your
Peter, the problem with your argument (other than the comments about housewives and dishes) is that it completely disregards how a school actually works.
What if the teacher with the lowest cumulative GPA for the last three years has been teaching co-taught or blended classes? Do they count? Or on the opposite end, what to do with the teacher who is teaching honors classes. Do they get to keep their jobs automatically? That hardly seems fair considering the disparity in student achievement levels that would be a given in those subjects. In many high schools, teachers will teach several different grade levels and instructional levels each year.
And theoretically, shouldn't the social studies teacher who is teaching US History in 11th grade have an advantage over the Global Studies teachers who teach 9th and 10th, given that most schools teach American history in 8th as well which should provide the students with more background?
And what about science and math? Are we comparing everyone in the entire department? Or do we break it down by area. As a general rule, Physics and calculus are much more difficult than Earth Science and Integrated Algebra, so you would think their scores would be lower. But students in NYS only have to take three years of science and math for graduation credit, so the students who take those courses tend to be the stronger academic students with a real interest in the material. Is it fair to compare them now?
Ultimately, it's a really difficult question because the answer SEEMS so obvious, but the reality is convoluted.
They are competing only in
They are competing only in their expertise. 11th Us History vs 11th US History. Biology vs Biology. Math IV vs Math IV
As for special ed, that is excluded from my argument and I currently don't know how to include it.
For Honors, the students (when I was in hs) got an extra .5 added to their GPA for their grade in that class so it is already weighted to be even. This allowed those students to compete with the bright kids in the normal classes for Valedictorian.
I don't know about out here, but in Spencerport where I went, teachers taught one subject in HS and middle school.
Occasionally teachers moved around in grade level. (Twice I had a previous teacher, once in 7th and 8th I had the same English teacher and 9th and 11th the same Math) But you just treat them as separate employment periods. Take where they are now with the latest data. Treat as a new employ at that level. So a 20 year teacher that just moved to 12th grade P.I.G. last year has this year and last years grade to count nothing before that.
Interesting how we have had a
Interesting how we have had a few days of blogging and there seems to be a lot of animosity from some individuals towards teachers. I really don't think everybody has their facts straight.
To start, tenure is not the iron clad defense of bad teachers as people believe. Teachers who truely are performing poorly can be removed. I also do not believe we have as many poorly performing teachers in our area as people think. I would like to know what people feel makes a poor teacher. If administration does their job, the few teachers that are there only for the pay and don't work hard for the kids will be weeded out early on at no cost to the district. Tenure is to protect good teachers from being replaced halfway through their career because an administrator has a grudge, and they do, or nepotism to create a job for family/ friend.
This brings me to my second point. You cannot just look at numbers. All classrooms are not created equal. There are special ed classes where they are just hoping to make some progress, there are inclusion rooms where there are general ed kids mixed with special ed., this obviously will keep overall averages down, then there are accelerated classrooms where averages are superb with minimal effort. Not to mention behavior issues, low motivation/ family support and the multitude of other factors that go into day to day instruction. Looking at just the numbers is not a good way to evaluate teachers. Also what about art teachers, gym, music library instructors... no state test for them, how is that fair?
To many people making negative comments have class envy. If you think teachers have it so good, go back to college spend 6 years getting a degree, prove yourself in rigorous interviews, get scrutinized for three years to earn tenure, get ridiculed constantly by the community you work so hard for, deal with all the day to day challenges in the classroom, push your students to pass the numerous state exams, deal with parents who don't give a crap, ... I think you get the point!
Don't make ignorant comments unless you are willing to walk a mile in their shoes.
I don't know things are now
I don't know things are now in Spencerport, but I taught English for ten years at Pittsford Mendon. During those ten years the fewest number of different classes I taught in a given year was three. The most I taught was six. I taught every single grade level during those ten years.
Even having them compete within a grade level doesn't always work though (although having it done over a period of years would help). And then, you are talking about cutting some departments in half or more.
There were times that the students in a class that I taught (we'll use English 11 as an example), would be far weaker or stronger as a whole than a class another teacher was teaching. This might not have had anything to do with either teacher, but rather the building class schedule. If my classes happen to be the ones scheduled at the same time as honors classes for other disciplines, I may end up with a group of students who are a little weaker. Ask any high school counselor and they will tell you that the master schedule at a high school is a nightmare.
Keith, I am just a guy on the
Keith,
I am just a guy on the outside using my own experience to come up with a semi equitable way to do it. And I don't know exactly how many jobs need to be cut to reach the savings that are needed. Obviously I have no input as to how its done. I'm not claiming to be all knowledgeable.
And I also understand grades don't reflect teaching ability. I scored C's and D's with my favorite teachers because I was lazy. I hated homework. I was told it was practice for the exams, but when I scored A's and high B's on the exams I came to the conclusion that "practice" wasn't necessary.
But I tried to eliminate as much bad data (like the data I provided my high school) with the averaging over years.
I think the system I mentioned gives equal balance to the power of years in service and to quality teaching as is mentioned in the poll.
I'm a bright guy but I'm not very educated. I am also certain other ways can be more equitable than mine.
As for the stay at home mom comment, I know they do more then dishes and laundry. It was not meant as an insult. I actually hope to be able to be a stay at home dad for my kids.
Mark,
I don't have a hatred for teachers. But I do think tenure is an obscure policy. Being part of the private sector, if I get a boss who doesn't like me and hurts or ends my career, I go and find another job. But more than likely in teaching if it was to happen, you'd finish the school year first. (Unless the administrator has no caring for the children you are trying to teach) And you would have your normally scheduled (and hopefully planned for) time off to find another job
I don't know when the metrics
I don't know when the metrics of educating children and filling tin cans with soup will become comparable, but I do not see it happening in the near future. Teachers (like any professional in the current economic climate) are well aware of the tenuous nature of employment. Most would be no less pleased to see any dead wood removed rather than suffer an arbitrary axe.
As noted, the educational system is not so simple that the under-informed can assign fool-proof fixes or evaluation criteria that comprehensively address perceived inadequacies.
Most classrooms are integrated- students of varied performance levels are blended with provisions for IEPs handled in special needs labs. With the exception of IP (honors) classes, any given classroom might have students ranging from Honor Society members to students with certified learning disabilities. Weighing the performance of a History teacher teaching IP Sociology and another History teacher with a blended class is apples to oranges.
The reality of the teaching field in terms of numbers in any given field, and which schools have the financial clout to hire the best candidate; leaves suburban schools with the advantage and rural/inner city schools somewhere else. If a school needs a physics or chemistry teacher, subject areas that are typically under-represented, the school can only choose from those candidates who apply. The school can't NOT offer physics because the applicants were all mediocre.
On the same token, even the most stellar teacher cannot avoid the realities of the bell curve- some children will perform well, others poorly and most, somewhere in between. A teacher with twenty students, one of whom has health issues that impact attendance, should not be penalized because absenteeism affected one child's GPA and tanked that teacher's performance score.
Ultimately, we are not discussing performance issues that can be tracked solely to the teacher. Oddly, since most of us have been through the public school system, it would seem that the variables would be more apparent.
So you critique my idea, but
So you critique my idea, but offer none of your own. Useful.
Peter, That's because he
Peter,
That's because he thinks you're "under informed".
Peter, I've posted on this
Peter, I've posted on this very subject innumerable times. I don't know of any magic fix- if there is one. I believe that a four-year degree, a teaching certificate, a masters degree for permanent certification, a culture of peer review combined with perpetual in-service training and on-going immersion in new techniques, new technology and curriculum review/updating along with constant professional development is a pretty comprehensive approach.
Frankly, spending more money on evaluation than teacher salaries seems a backward approach.
John, I can pick my own skirmishes without your meddling.
CM, Sorry, but you were
CM,
Sorry, but you were getting a bit condescending.
"a masters degree for
"a masters degree for permanent certification..."
There’s an ongoing healthy discussion on the requiring of a master’s degree for permanent certification. New York is one of only a handful of states that has such a requirement and the results, depending on one’s interpretation of the data, speak for themselves. At the very least, the available evidence suggests that the link between teachers needing a master's degree for permanent certification and being a better teacher is open to debate and not settled. For more info, see Hanushek, E.A. In press. The economic value of higher teacher quality. <I>Economics of Education Review</I> xx:xxx.
The best teachers -- as in
The best teachers -- as in any profession -- have passion. That's not something you get with a piece of parchment.
And I don't know how you measure it.
John, I picked the phrase
John, I picked the phrase 'under-informed' as the least provocative descriptor of anyone looking in at something he/she may not have a complete picture of. I don't think that the critics of public education are dumb or out of touch. I think most people who criticize education do so from a narrow perspective based on their own or second-hand experiences. I doubt many have the opportunity to be part of the hiring or firing process. I also doubt that most people have a complete understanding of professional development in public education process. Having worked in a public school for nearly thirty years, I can offer some broader scope to the discussion.
I agree with Howard. The best teachers have qualities that do not come from formal education. One has to put some confidence in the notion that MOST people who choose to be teachers have that quality and go through the necessary training to hone that passion and discover the tool kit for applying that passion.
Unfortunately, the passionate teacher has to bridge a slew of obstacles that distract them and their students from success. It is those factors that tend to be minimized in the pursuit of quantifying educational performance.
I applaud anyone who seeks to improve the quality of education in their community. The best way to do that is to get involved in the local school.
I resent high taxes as much as the next, but I don't think that austerity is a particularly effective motivator- primarily as the sole intervention.
If one considers the programs that usually get cut (art, music, drama, field trips, athletics) when the budget axe falls, one can envision most of the programs that maintain student interest.
I agree with Steve Hawley- it would serve all if the state mandates were suspended to allow local districts to maximize the diminished funds available to them.
I also think- contrary to the Wisconsin mess -that our new governor would be wise to meet with AFSCME, CSEA, NYSUT, PEF, SEIU and NEA and work out a strategy to mitigate salaries and layoffs.
Finally, I think the State Ed Dept would do well to head off any witch hunts by proposing a new administrative model that allows multiple schools to share some of the premium pay officials.
Who or what would determine
Who or what would determine teacher performance? Big can of worms.
Last hired....first fired. Cut and dried.
When in Middle school, the
When in Middle school, the classes were made up in blocks, A block students were usually better than B block students, C block students were the slower learners. How on earth could you find a fair way to grade teachers if one teacher has all A block students while another has all C block students?
I have to agree with Richard, there are too many variables in the equation to measure teaching quality, and teacher performance. Seniority will be the criteria to determine who stays and who goes. Seniority rules in union shops, it is the first criteria when determining who gets laid off.