Method to Grade Teachers Provokes Battles – Readers’ Comments – NYTimes.com
I really enjoyed the comments about this article, especially comment number 19 which shares my opinion of RTTT with, “Wow, someone who directly profits from this thinks its a good idea. RTTT= Rush to the trough.”
Method to Grade Teachers Provokes Battles – Readers’ Comments – NYTimes.com.
Why Are We Pushing So Hard Against Arne?
Largely, it seems Arne Duncan believes that students’ heads are empty vessels, into which we can pour knowledge.
This idea about education has been called Theory T for the idea that one can just transfer information from a teacher’s mind to a student’s. It’s been around at least a hundred years. In the book Wittgenstein’s Poker, about a shouting match between two philosophers, we learn that even in 1900, educators were arguing over whether Theory T worked or whether the way to teach was to deal with the pre-c0nceived notions students have in order to have them make sense of the new idea that is being taught (nicknamed Theory R). Remember the article about how giving people facts does not change the misperceptions? And the people seem to cling to their misperceptions even more tightly afterward? Kids are often the same way about subtracting larger numbers from smaller numbers, or division that does not end with nice whole numbers. Good teaching activities can convince them to do problems the right way for a while, but in time those misperceptions erupt again. In my years of teaching in Houston, Seattle, and Cambridge, it’s become obvious to me that Theory T works very poorly, and the more difficult Theory R is the better way to help kids understand. To approach them as agents of their own education, not objects of my teaching.
Arne has been extremely successful at changing the laws and policies of Chicago and America to follow his approach–but we, the teachers who are pushing back, can see the fundamental flaw in his logic, and the further we race down Arne’s path, the more effort it will be to get back on the right path when Arne is retired and collecting six-figures as a figurehead on some non-profit or corporation’s board of directors. Elites come and go, but the teachers in public schools are there for a lifetime of work, and that outlasts ed fads.
Still, on the political side, we who know that Theory R is better will need to find a better way to present this more realistic approach to education, so the proponents of Theory T do less damage.
The Answer Sheet – Study blasts popular teacher evaluation method
The Answer Sheet – Study blasts popular teacher evaluation method.
Public Media’s Impact on Young Readers
A concrete, proven idea that works and is being expanded. Refreshing!
But, while Congress continues to support that work, policymakers rarely describe it as an integral part of the country’s larger education reform strategy. Perhaps because of its association with the now seemingly ancient medium of television (and despite the fact that the CPB and PBS have invested heavily in digital and Internet-based formats), public media have come to be viewed as old hat.
That could soon change, though, thanks to a recent surge in scholarly attention to public media’s impact on early literacy development. In 2005, the U.S. Department of Education dramatically scaled up the Ready to Learn program’s investment in research, requiring that fully one-quarter of its five-year, $70 million grant go toward independent evaluations and studies (with an emphasis on randomized control group designs).
Education Week: Public Media’s Impact on Young Readers.
Education Week: Senate Report Hints at a Definition for What Works
Absolutely nothing can hold a candle to the importance of well trained teachers with ongoing, relevant professional development but it’s not happening. This is not a new innovative idea. It is solidly based in scientific evidence as noted in this article. Successful schools in other countries understand the importance of professional development and allot significant resources to it. Here, it’s the first thing to be cut from budgets.
At a May hearing of the House Education and Labor Committee, lawmakers and witnesses said they doubted Mr. Duncan could show proof that his turnaround, transformation, restart, and closure models are effective at improving student achievement. Even Democratic lawmakers voiced skepticism, and House Education Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., stated after the hearing that the ESEA re-authorization would focus on “research-based, proven, core elements of successful turnaround.”
. . .
That finding is particularly discouraging given two other studies on professional development. One analysis of nine rigorous scientific studies, released in 2007, found that professional development with fewer than 14 hours of training had no statistically significant effect on student achievement, in comparison to those with at least 30 hours.
And this study’s first report found that teachers in high-performing countries generally spend less time on instruction and much more time each week meeting, planning, and constructing lessons with other teachers. Read more about it in this EdWeek write-up.
via Education Week: Senate Report Hints at a Definition for What Works.
Overcoming Despair as we Fight for Our Schools – Living in Dialogue – Education Week Teacher
I recently re-discovered Anthony Cody’s blog, “Living in Dialogue,” and I highly recommend it for anybody who really cares about the long-term impact of the current education reform storm. We know what our students need and we have to pull together to make it happen.
Overcoming Despair as we Fight for Our Schools – Living in Dialogue – Education Week Teacher.
Needs Improvement: Where Teacher Report Cards Fall Short – WSJ.com
Some reading for Mr. Duncan and Mr. Gates.
Needs Improvement: Where Teacher Report Cards Fall Short – WSJ.com.
Putting Teachers to the Test: The Debate Over Value-Added – The Numbers Guy – WSJ
Putting Teachers to the Test: The Debate Over Value-Added – The Numbers Guy – WSJ.
U.S. Schools Chief to Push Disclosure of Data on Teachers
Arne Duncan is one scary dude. Obama’s appointee is ready to publish details about teachers’ dubious evaluation scores. Any method of evaluating educators that involves bubbled standardized tests will suffice, solid scientific data to support evaluation methods is irrelevant. This is Duncan’s campaign against teachers at full tilt.
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan will call for all states and school districts to make public whether their instructors are doing enough to raise students’ test scores and to share other school-level information with parents, according to a text of a speech he is scheduled to make Wednesday.
via Education Week: U.S. Schools Chief to Push Disclosure of Data on Teachers.
Focus on Instruction Turns Around Chicago Schools
There are many ideas that work without drastic, unlikely measures as suggested by Arne Duncan and the Hedge Fund Boys. This is one example from Duncan’s own backyard.
The “Focused Instruction Process” has four main components: shared leadership, targeted professional development, continuous improvement, and parent engagement. It uses an eight-step process designed to make sure that students master skills by providing focused lessons, formative assessments, reteaching after assessing where each student stands, and a reassessment to measure student progress.
via Education Week: Focus on Instruction Turns Around Chicago Schools.
