So Bill Gates has been making the rounds...

[Gmaniac]

I don't agree with this. SUre, you'll get a vindictive student here or there, but unless you are an extreme A-hole, there is no way all of your students are going to grade you poorly. If you are an A-hole, then its fair to evaluate you on that as its hard to learn from someone like that. Its only 1/3 of the formula and you have to take it with a grain of salt at times, but to have it be part of the process is more than fair.

I think you (and others) underestimate how many students would "grade" their teachers in a biased and/or unfair manner.

These are kids we are talking about. And, at high school level and below, they are forced to go to school by law... not because they are serious about education.

Therefore, a good teacher who is serious about education is going to be looked upon negatively by many students... especially by "average" (as opposed to advanced/honors/AP) students who really don't want to be at school in the first place.

In fact, a good teacher would be in a bind... caught between their desire to raise the bar for students and their fear of risking their livelihood if/when bad student survey results come back. That's the situation this plan puts good teachers in...

[Payton34]

Yeah me either, the teachers who gave a damn i would have rated high, teachers who rolled in the tv and popped in a video everyday i wouldnt have. At some point the excuses gotta stop and people need to earn their paycheck no?

I dobt know of any job or career where firing someone becuase the job they did led to horrible results was somehow non kosher. Its mind boggling.

All i seem to hear is why NOTHING seems to work, and almost no teacher trying to make it work.

Teachers seem to think its ok to fail at their task, so why are we surlrised the kids have adopted the same mindset?

Stop the excuses and stop blaming everyone else as to why they cant do their job.

If they canr, then wjy is it wrong to fire them and find people who can?

It is clear that you are going to keep whining without reading anyone's responses...

To you it is: Kids fail because teachers suck.

You have nothing to back that up. You aren't going to allow any explaination to seep in. Its all about your pre-determined position on the matter and how every teacher needs to be Jaime Escalante or be fired....

Well fuggin' a.... Every IT employee needs to be Bill Gates!!!! Every auto-worker needs to be Henry Ford!!! Every politician needs to be Abraham Lincoln!!!! Every firefighter needs to be that dude from Backdraft!!!!

Either that or BE FIRED!!!!

I mean why not hold all occupations to your same lofty expectations? 8 hour days? 40 hour weeks? F**k that!!! Your a TEACHER gawddamnit!!!! You get PAID some SERIOUS BUCKS!!!! Drop your life and get out there and DO SOMETHING!!!! Simply going to schools and TEACHING isn't enough damnit!!! You must be the parent for 200 kids each semester!!!! You must be the guidance counselor!!!! You must be the truancy officer!!!!!

If you are unwilling to do all this on $40K a year you must be a LAZY BASTARD!!!

(Do I have your position about right there USAF? )

[DutchBird]

Because one of a teacher's jobs is to discipline recalcitrant students, and I've yet to see any teenager that reacts enthusiastically to that.

In everything else, the chain of evaluation goes down, not up. My boss gets to evaluate my job performance. A drill sergeant gets to evaluate their recruits. A coach gets to evaluate the team's players.

But somehow, in education, we seem to feel that the students should get to evaluate the teachers as much--or even more--than the teachers do the students. And that's nonsense, particularly if the teacher is also the coach.

First of all, I agree with you that students should not get to evaluate teachers to the extent that teachers do the student.

Oddly enough - your supposition seems not to hold true to a surprising extent, at least based on empirical evidence. Yes, there are circumstances where it does hold true, sometimes for groups as a whole (see Gmaniac's example of his experience), or on a personal level. But even there... in my limited experience and that of my fellow student teachers students were surprisingly honest, even if they did not like the subject or were regularly disciplined by me/them (or received low grades). Of the teacher evaluations I did in my class, the students seemed to be honest, and there were few (I think max 3 out of some 60) who pulled the stunt you mentioned on at least one evaluation. And on at least two occasions the student started to redo/redid the evaluation honestly. At the risk of sounding naive and overly idealistic, in my limited experience at the heart there are four main things that you should do as a teacher (towards students): give the students responsibility/respect, be consistent, be fair, and be honest. And then their evaluations also tend to be that... even, eventually, those by many of the 'rotten apples.' And even if they are students who refuse to do any work.

I think in many jobs/industries actually the problem is that the chain of evaluation only goes down, not up.

[Jim in NYC]

First of all, I agree with you that students should not get to evaluate teachers to the extent that teachers do the student.

Oddly enough - your supposition seems not to hold true to a surprising extent, at least based on empirical evidence. Yes, there are circumstances where it does hold true, sometimes for groups as a whole (see Gmaniac's example of his experience), or on a personal level. But even there... in my limited experience and that of my fellow student teachers students were surprisingly honest, even if they did not like the subject or were regularly disciplined by me/them (or received low grades). Of the teacher evaluations I did in my class, the students seemed to be honest, and there were few (I think max 3 out of some 60) who pulled the stunt you mentioned on at least one evaluation. And on at least two occasions the student started to redo/redid the evaluation honestly. At the risk of sounding naive and overly idealistic, in my limited experience at the heart there are four main things that you should do as a teacher (towards students): give the students responsibility/respect, be consistent, be fair, and be honest. And then their evaluations also tend to be that... even, eventually, those by many of the 'rotten apples.' And even if they are students who refuse to do any work.

I think in many jobs/industries actually the problem is that the chain of evaluation only goes down, not up.

Different culture, D.B.--I haven't heard of anyone in the Netherlands suing because the teacher gave their kid a B+ instead of an A.

[DutchBird]

I think you (and others) underestimate how many students would "grade" their teachers in a biased and/or unfair manner.

These are kids we are talking about. And, at high school level and below, they are forced to go to school by law... not because they are serious about education.

Therefore, a good teacher who is serious about education is going to be looked upon negatively by many students... especially by "average" (as opposed to advanced/honors/AP) students who really don't want to be at school in the first place.

In fact, a good teacher would be in a bind... caught between their desire to raise the bar for students and their fear of risking their livelihood if/when bad student survey results come back. That's the situation this plan puts good teachers in...

I am not so sure... empirical research seems to suggest this not to be the case for teacher evaluations, though of course this could be the result of flaws in the research (classes which did the experiment, students knowing evaluations could not get the teacher fired).

Surprisingly, students seem to want to be able to respect the teacher, and like a firm teacher - provided he is honest, fair, consistent and is reasonable. Weak teachers who let students do determine what happens apparently get as bad if not worse student reviews than camp-guard-tyrant style teachers. For many students, it seems that not doing anything for a long period seems to actually make them want to do something useful. Anecdotally also experienced by a friend who got to teach one of the most notorious classes in one of the most notorious inner city schools in the country (rest of the teachers were stunned by his results, and when they adopted some of his approach, their results improved as well; he did two things: respect them (let them work with power tools), adapt somewhat to their interest, be consistent/fair, and let the kids experience the consequences (e.g. no power tools with misbehaviour)).

[DutchBird]

Different culture, D.B.--I haven't heard of anyone in the Netherlands suing because the teacher gave their kid a B+ instead of an A.

Actually, they have pretty much started to do so over the summer, IIRC.

[ForWhoForWhat?]

THIS is what teachers need.

Test scores and graduation rates are the best indicators of educational progress, but somehow the idea of people actually having to get their hands dirty and do some hard work turning things around scares people.

My charge to teachers: what you do matters. Everything you do in and outside of the classroom matters. And failure to educate your students for any reason is YOUR failure.

If one of the guys i had to patch up died, it was my failure. Doesnt matter if he had a 70% burn surgace or if the kid was without oxygen for 15 minutes, or the fragment sliced the guys abdominal aaorta. Any loss of life was a failure in my book. Maybe more teachers should think yhe same way.

Um, according to the ed reformers, this is what we need:

[ForWhoForWhat?]

Are there crappy schools and poor kids coming out of poverty? Sure, but you measure the delta. If a teacher gets kids who test at 10% readiness for a grade coming in and by the end of the year 15% of those kids have achieved, then that teacher just had a delta of 5% and did a decent job. You do in-class evaluations. You take into account other factors. At the end of the day though, you have to evaluate kids from school to school, from district to district, on some sort of standard scale. I've yet to see a teacher's union actually point at any sort of evaluation method that has a discrete measuring vehicle included as one they'd support.

that's because there hasn't been any mathematically, or statistically sound descrete measuring vehicle presented that reflects what happens in the classroom with any fidelity.

anyway as far as your teacher that raised achievement 5%...that's actually not enough by current standards (at leats as far as aschool measurement goes).

First, we’ll say that this school reports test scores instead of proficiency rates, and that the scores are comparable between grades. Second, every year, our school welcomes a new cohort of sixth graders that is the exact same size and has the exact same average score as preceding cohorts – 30 out of 100, well below the state average of 65. Third and finally, there is no mobility at this school. Every student who enters sixth grade stays there for three years, and goes to high school upon completion of eighth grade. No new students are admitted mid-year.

Okay, here’s where it gets interesting: Suppose this school is phenomenally effective in boosting its students’ scores. In fact, each year, every single student gains 20 points. It is the highest growth rate in the state. Believe it or not, using the metrics we commonly use to judge schoolwide “growth” or “gains,” this school would still look completely ineffective. Take a look at the figure below.
It is very simple, just showing the progression of scores at our hypothetical school. As we already know, every incoming cohort of sixth graders (next to the green arrows) has an average score of 30 on the test. As indicated by the yellow arrows, the next year, in seventh grade, they all pick up 20 points, for an average of 50. And, finally, they pick up another 20 points by eighth grade, and are promoted to high school (red arrows) with an average score of 70. In other words, thanks to the wonderful effectiveness of their superstar school, every cohort enters at 30, well below the state average, and leaves at 70 (slightly above the average of 65).

But here’s the big problem: The school’s average score of 50 doesn’t change. It is completely flat. Anyone looking at this school’s score each year might say it’s doing poorly. After all, the average score of 50 is below the state average, and there has been no “growth.” How can such a wonderful school not show improvement?

http://shankerblog.org/?p=7455

[ForWhoForWhat?]

I don't think I like in class monitoring. I would prefer some sort of remote monitoring in which a proctor and a sueprvisor monitor the class at random. I think that active monitors change the environment.

Kinda of a "big brother" approach to evaluations, but i'm not completely opposed to that. In fact i taught in a school with camera's in every classroom. You kinda forget about it, but you're still aware in the back of your mind. The kids, on the other hand pay the cameras no mind at all...

[ForWhoForWhat?]

The easiest method is to take the end of year tests of the kids from the previous school year. If you have a beginning of year test it's ripe for intentional suppression of scores.

I'm not saying I have all the answers, but I firmly believe you at some point have to say "This is a 3rd grade curriculum. By the end of 3rd grade all students who are achieving at an acceptable level should know these certain things. Here's a test that covers that subject matter." And you hold teachers and schools accountable for meeting some threshold of x% of students passing or at least improving from year to year.

I was under the impression this already happens...I know it does in DE and if it isn't happeneing everywhere already it will w/in the next year or so.

[ForWhoForWhat?]

---

1. No doing your job is in fact realistic, and the sad thing is teachers unions have blocked attempts to weed out lazy teachers and make good ones pay. If you cannot teach the way your job demands you too, then you should choose another profession.

2. Yes teachers are lazy. Not all, but most. Anytime "i dont get paid to do that" id your mantra, aboyt things that ARE in your job description, than it displays laziness. Imo teaching should be 100 incentivized linked to test scores and graduation rates. And any teacher that fails in those areas could write a summary of events as to why they failed at their only job...

3. "Lean on me" did have a scene where bad apples where thrown out, but as a kid in innercity schooled system i could tell you those kids dont make it past the 9th grade before the dropout. So that excuse os moot.


All i hear is excuse after excuse why teachers suck. Who cares why your not doing your job, we care how you plan on fixing it, instead of soaking up tax payer dollars for a half assed job.

While i appreciate your enthusiasm and participation in the thread, your posts consistently state you're not really qualified to share on this topic.

After all, if you all military folks had not been so got damn lazy and done a better job over there in the M.E. we'd be out of Afghanistan already and been out of Iraq a long time ago. Most G.I's i know were just over there dragging their feet to collect a check, blow stuff up and get away from home because they didn't have any other marketable skills. All i hear is excuses about regulations and rules as to why they couldn't get in get out and get home, when in reality they just wanted to drag it out so they could get paid. And the whining about the lack of armour and local support and what not. You go do your job with what you have; not what you wish you had. Bunch of nancies!

See how that works?

[ForWhoForWhat?]

FWFW, I'm sure you've posted this before, but can you provide a quick summary on what you believe to be the best method for teacher performance evaluation?

direct observation by a qualified individual, both announced and unannounced. I like Flyer's idea of remote viewing, however, i need assurances the viewer isn't watching porn or something while they are conducting my eval. I have had a couple observations where the evaluator doodled and/or already had the eval written before they walked in the room. While they gave me good marks, i certainly didn't learn anything to make me a better teacher--but i had proof the bozo wasn't doing his job had they decided to cite me for something. With remote evaluation, i can't do that.

I dont think you learn much from an announced observation. You can pinpoint a teacher that truly, truly sucks, but beyond that, you need assurances the teacher is consistently prepared; unannounced observations is the only way to get that. I would do 2 announced, 2 unannounced each year (1 per quarter) for the first 3 years and then cut that in half after that. I guess a few studies have shown you peak in years 3-5, though i think we can still improve the little things here and there after that.

But my way only works if the evaluator does their job both good and bad.

[ForWhoForWhat?]

I swear this board goes through more teacher threads than football.

You're welcome and it is NST portion. I've been waiting for someone to bytch about my numerous ed threads. It is intentional. Isn't there the quote, "without an educated public, there can be no democracy?" Folks don't know what is really going on in education. There's a lot of ignorant assumptions and i hope to shed a little light on what's really happening and who is making those decisions. If it bothers you, press on and post in one of the 45 gun threads.

[clmor]

While i appreciate your enthusiasm and participation in the thread, your posts consistently state you're not really qualified to share on this topic.

After all, if you all military folks had not been so got damn lazy and done a better job over there in the M.E. we'd be out of Afghanistan already and been out of Iraq a long time ago. Most G.I's i know were just over there dragging their feet to collect a check, blow stuff up and get away from home because they didn't have any other marketable skills. All i hear is excuses about regulations and rules as to why they couldn't get in get out and get home, when in reality they just wanted to drag it out so they could get paid. And the whining about the lack of armour and local support and what not. You go do your job with what you have; not what you wish you had. Bunch of nancies!

See how that works?

Not really.

As a teacher - using this as an analogy - quite frankly, I think you give more validation to any negative view more than you realize. I would actually be embarrassed making it.

I was embarrassed enough for you to log in - and the last time I logged in was to probably call USAF out on race baiting tripe so it isn't a defense of him by any means.

And I think the grammar jokes are weak sauce as he has said many times he is on phone. Most of you are way better than Jim in that regard.

[puddycat]

Formal evaluation is the last step to get rid of a bad employee. I give evaluations every year to the 3-5 people I supervise. If there are any surprises in an evaluation, I haven't been doing my job as a supervisor the rest of the year. I always try to get a 360 view, i.e. supervisor, colleague, and supervisee. I was amazed how often things came up while interviewing colleagues and supervisees that illlustrated stupid power games and bullying behavior that needed to be addressed.
I was on a school board for 5 years during which time we hired 3 different principals/superintendents for a one-school district. EVERY time a principal commented that his/her evaluation should not include interviews with staff it quickly became apparent that there was supervisor problem including poor communication of goals at best or inequal or abusive treatment at worst. So yeah, I think that student evaluations are important.