Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Building a Better Teacher

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Education Donate to DU
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:03 PM
Original message
Building a Better Teacher
Edited on Sat Mar-06-10 12:30 PM by tonysam
More anti-teacher bullshit from the NYT:


Around the country, education researchers were beginning to address similar questions. The testing mandates in No Child Left Behind had generated a sea of data, and researchers were now able to parse student achievement in ways they never had before. A new generation of economists devised statistical methods to measure the “value added” to a student’s performance by almost every factor imaginable: class size versus per-pupil funding versus curriculum. When researchers ran the numbers in dozens of different studies, every factor under a school’s control produced just a tiny impact, except for one: which teacher the student had been assigned to. Some teachers could regularly lift their students’ test scores above the average for children of the same race, class and ability level. Others’ students left with below-average results year after year. William Sanders, a statistician studying Tennessee teachers with a colleague, found that a student with a weak teacher for three straight years would score, on average, 50 percentile points behind a similar student with a strong teacher for those years. Teachers working in the same building, teaching the same grade, produced very different outcomes. And the gaps were huge. Eric Hanushek, a Stanford economist, found that while the top 5 percent of teachers were able to impart a year and a half’s worth of learning to students in one school year, as judged by standardized tests, the weakest 5 percent advanced their students only half a year of material each year.

This record encouraged a belief in some people that good teaching must be purely instinctive, a kind of magic performed by born superstars. As Jane Hannaway, the director of the Education Policy Center at the Urban Institute and a former teacher, put it to me, successful teaching depends in part on a certain inimitable “voodoo.” You either have it or you don’t. “I think that there is an innate drive or innate ability for teaching,” Sylvia Gist, the dean of the college of education at Chicago State University, said when I visited her campus last year.

That belief has spawned a nationwide movement to improve the quality of the teaching corps by firing the bad teachers and hiring better ones. “Creating a New Teaching Profession,” a new collection of academic papers, politely calls this idea “deselection”; Joel Klein, the New York City schools chancellor, put it more bluntly when he gave a talk in Manhattan recently. “If we don’t change the personnel,” he said, “all we’re doing is changing the chairs.”

The reformers are also trying to create incentives to bring what Michelle Rhee, the schools chancellor in Washington, calls a “different caliber of person” into the profession. Rhee has proposed giving cash bonuses to those teachers whose students learn the most, as measured by factors that include standardized tests — and firing those who don’t measure up. Under her suggested compensation system, the city’s best teachers could earn as much as $130,000 a year. (The average pay for a teacher in Washington is now $65,000.) A new charter school in New York City called the Equity Project offers starting salaries of $125,000. “Merit pay,” a once-obscure free-market notion of handing cash bonuses to the best teachers, has lately become a litmus test for seriousness about improving schools. The Obama administration’s education department has embraced merit pay; the federal Teacher Incentive Fund, which finances experimental merit-pay programs across the country, rose from $97 million to $400 million this year. And states interested in competing for a piece of the $4.3 billion discretionary fund called the Race to the Top were required to change their laws to give principals and superintendents the right to judge teachers based on their students’ academic performance.


Fucking unbelievable yet not surprising the media fall for this bullshit. The problem isn't "shitty"
teachers; it is with rotten administrators who are not held accountable to ANYBODY. Besides, there are TOO MANY TEACHERS right now; if more students realize just how crappy this occupation has become, they will avoid it like the plague.

And there is little that can be done about poverty and other factors affecting students at least as it pertains to what teachers and school districts can do, but fat chance these billionaires give a shit.


More
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Fucking treacherous.
Edited on Sat Mar-06-10 12:19 PM by Starry Messenger
My first red flag on this article "Eric Hanushek, a Stanford economist", totally burying the fact that he's a "Hoover Institute" economist, as I suspected and confirmed with google. Not only anti-teacher then but red-baiting tripe. http://edpro.stanford.edu/hanushek/content.asp?ContentId=61 Condaleeza Rice is a Hoover Fellow. They're hiding the fact from the public that this is a completely right wing operation. I am so pissed.

Sorry, I should add in some info about the Hoover Institute for those who might not be familiar with them:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/hoover-institution


* Hoover is well-known for its prominent influence over national Republican policy.
* Named for founder Herbert Hoover, the Hoover Institution is "a prominent center devoted to interdisciplinary scholarship and advanced research in the social sciences with an emphasis on public policy relevance. The Institution houses one of the world's largest private archives and libraries on political, economic, and social change in the 20th century and has more that 100 researchers consisting of both resident fellows and visiting scholars from throughout the world."
* Three Primary Programmatic Themes: American Institutions and Economic Performance, Democracy Free Markets, and International Rivalries and Global Cooperation
* Hoover's approach to some of these areas is described as: "Societies based on individualism rather than classes, thus confronting the issues of race, gender, ethnicity, and so forth;" and "The appropriate scope of government's involvement in areas such as education, health care, and the environment as it provides public services and regulates private enterprise."
* Some of Hoover's major issues: education reform that centers around private school vouchers and charter schools, dismantling affirmative action, privatization of social services, "flat tax" and other tax reduction schemes, deregulation of industry, Reagan's policy legacy, and "character education."

Hoover's Activities:

* Hoover is well-known for its influential role in developing President Bush's economic policy, the Hoover Institution is "the…conservative think tank President Bush looks to for ideas."
* Forging strong ties between right-wing ideologues, right-wing think tanks and right-wing policy makers; many of its scholars have worked for various Republican Presidential Administrations— Nixon, Ford, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and the current President W. Bush.
* Currently there are 8 Hoover fellows on the Defense policy board advising Defense Secretary Rumsfeld.
* California Gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwartzenegger hired several Hoover Institution members as consultants for his 2003 election campaign.
* Hoover publishes and funds research and public policy by its own scholars and fellows.

Hoover's Scholars and the White House: Bush (former and present), Reagan, Nixon, and Ford






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. AND you have a DEMOCRATIC administration on board with this.
It is horrible beyond belief.

I posted the David Pakter blog post which is in part a response to this horrible article and notes the UFT is completely in bed with BloomKlein.

We are screwed as a country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Let's repeat this again for the kids at home
Edited on Sat Mar-06-10 12:31 PM by Starry Messenger
THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS TAKING ITS EDUCATION POLICY FROM THE HOOVER INSTITUTE. fucked!!!!!!! edit: I'll read the David Patker response when I come off the ceiling. I'm so angry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. And you have people on DU doing contortion acts by claiming
this is okay, simply because these people have too much invested in Obama.

It's time to wake up and smell the coffee, folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. It's sad.
Presidents come and go, but these destructive policies live on for years. The wheels came off for me over a year ago when he threw the GBLT community under the bus. I knew the rest of us were screwed too. I just didn't know how screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I always knew of this guy's neoliberal tendencies
I really didn't want him to get the nomination because of it...the Reagan admiration really was a huge red flag if nothing else about him although I knew all about his privatizing tendencies regarding education...Obama is just a disaster on this issue and millions will pay the price.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. The blog isn't by Pakter but his story has been published there. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Hanushek is also a leader in the "Money Doesn't Matter" movement.
He's the only always pointing out that Utah's test scores are higher than anyone else's with a lower per pupil expenditure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. The NYT quotes all of the usual suspects and engages in all kinds of false rhetoric about public ed.
You'd expect this nonsense on National Review or American Spectator, but not in the supposed "newspaper of record."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Sanders' data has been used to develop RTTT grant RFP language.
States that want to qualify MUST be able to track individual student GROWTH data with teacher identifiers. That's why CO is in and why TN and IN are in - maybe more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I notice the article doesn't point that out either.
All people are going to read is "Stanford economist" and nod their heads sagely. Grr.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I taught school finance at Univ. of Denver for years.
You can't do that without knowing his name. But he's not really a household word outside that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. What is the Holmes Group really about?
Page three, members are quoted. I'm looking for background but so far I'm only getting pdf files that cost money and a website that looks like it's selling something. http://www.holmespartnership.org/about/history.cfm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-10 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
14. There are too many teachers in some fields, not enough in others
Its one of the reasons some (including myself) argue for pay differentials based on expertise for HS teachers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-08-10 01:19 AM
Response to Original message
15. I just read the entire article and I don't find it "anti-teacher" at all.
There seems to be a whole lot of framing that "well, we thought this showed that ... and so we tried ... but that didn't work." In fact, a lot of things didn't work, including the RW's favorites.

What seems to work is some fairly basic techniques that have more to do with learning how to speak to children. It sounds like the sort of stuff that I would have thought education majors were already being trained in, but apparently not. The take-home message seems to be that good teaching is a teachable skill, but it's not being taught -- a few teachers develop it on their own, but it would be better if all teachers, including the "merely adequate" ones could be taught these techniques, and develop into teachers as good as the ones who work it out by their own natural genius. Apparently the label "classroom management" has been slapped on all the important details, which have then been demeaned as beneath serious study.

YMMV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-08-10 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Yes it is. It's full of anti-teacher bullshit and praising the likes
of BloomKlein and Rhee.

The problem in education is NOT the teachers--it's with the assholes who run the schools. THAT'S why the article is full of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-08-10 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. That's what the article was designed to look like
The sources they draw on have a history of being very anti-teacher.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Education Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC