Brian Cohen
  • Making the Grade Blog
  • About Me
  • Tutoring
  • Press
  • Resources to Share

NCTQ Study Analysis: Standard 3

6/5/2013

0 Comments

 
I am sorry it is taking so long to write these analyses. As we get closer to the end of the year so many students are now rushing to get work in that was due weeks, if not months, ago. The grading has become a bit ridiculous. But, since grades go in on June 12 (since that makes sense - *sarcasm*) I'll have more time soon.

Another I'd like to point out before starting: Lisa Haver wrote a great article dissecting the background of those who put together this study. Check out her article here.

--------

This section of the NCTQ study discusses a dubious concept know as "teacher tenure." I say it is dubious because it is not true tenure as most higher-education folks would have us understand it. A teacher who has tenure does not have a job for life. These teachers do not however have to prove as stringently their skills as an educator because for their first 3-4 years of teaching they have improved markedly in front of constant observations. 

Finding 3.1: NCTQ points out that PA is one of the majority of the states that allow a stricter due process system for teachers who have more experience. They quote that 11 states allow for some kind of probationary period extension from the 3-4 years already in the system. Apparently 3-4 years is not enough time to make a decision on the quality of an individual teacher and NCTQ thinks it should be longer. I would argue that if principals were given more time to actually observe (and were more objective with their observations) we could get a more honest picture of what's happening in the classroom.

Finding 3.2/3: Teacher effectiveness is brought up and dismissed by NCTQ as being a part of teacher tenure. They say only the amount of time a teacher has been in a classroom is used to determine their status. One might ask what they were doing in their 3-4 years in the classroom to warrant receiving stricter observation benefits? I would point out they were observed multiple times and received satisfactory results. This seems to be more of a criticism of the evaluation process than the outcomes thereof. The one thing I might agree upon is having a more scaled sense of how well a teacher is doing - if I am an outstanding teacher, I'd like to know that; if I need some work, then give me some time to improve before labeling me as "unsatisfactory." 

Again, however, these designations need to mean something in the processes that follow. Without support, a "needs improvement" rating might as well be a pink slip.

Finding 3.4: NCTQ says that there are flaws in the system because few teachers with "tenure" are dismissed for poor performance. But perhaps their skill levels have improved? Or, maybe there was a failure in the system itself since that teacher was moved from their placement and a new principal was judging them. If there were a more across-the-board evaluation system, perhaps using a committee of educators who sticks with the teacher regardless of a move, then things would be better.

Overall the outcome of these policy recommendations would be to demotivate teachers so much that new ones would not want to fill the ranks of the retirees. Without protections in place that allow for creativity and experimentation among the veterans, why would new cohorts want the job?
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Author

    I am a math teacher in the New York Department of Education. I infuse technology and real-world problems into my curriculum in order to prepare my students for the future. I would love for people across the country to recognize we teachers can't do it alone. If you don't believe me, come visit my classroom!

    Picture

    Contact Me

    Picture

    Email Updates

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Archives

    March 2022
    September 2021
    August 2021
    September 2020
    August 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    August 2018
    June 2018
    April 2018
    September 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.