http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/03/27/how-to-raise-the-status-of-teachers/we-need-to-stop-treating-teachers-as-widgets
I have to agree with Mr. Daly, teachers should be treated based on their performance. The status of the teaching profession is at a very low point in the US, this is partly b/c of the bad teachers people had to put up with, leaving a stain upon their views of teaching. When a school has a great teacher, one who really connects with his or her students, who can actually teach something to them, who is committed to teaching and all that it entails, they should recognize such superb performances.
Good teachers have been a pivotal point in young minds for as long as there have been schools. But the same goes for bad ones. I respect everyone of my teachers on the first day of school, it's up to them how they use that respect. Some teachers will be worthy of that respect, and, in my eyes at least, they are some of the most inspirational and respect worthy individuals I have ever had the pleasure to be in the same room as, let alone being taught by them. However, those great people don't get the recognition they deserve as teachers. This is because of an influx in the scales of quality educators and those who are not of such quality. While seniority it the only thing most teachers can look forward to, the real "go getters," the bright and best, and the highest preforming teachers, don't have any intensives to truly help children in their learning endeavors.
Seniority causes things like "last-in, first-out," which bases the removal of teachers solely on how long the teacher has been there. It is illegal in 14 states to consider job performance in layoff decisions. Why would any self-respecting parent vote for something like that? This policy doesn't help the students, or the good teachers. It doesn't encourage teachers to do anything but show up. If you have to get rid of a teacher or two, wouldn't you want to get rid of the teacher who can't teach, the one who doesn't help the students, the one who wastes the students time with things like busy work, rather than the young teacher who raises test scores and attendance because of their enthusiasm and teaching methods?
It truly, truly amazes me how some teachers are allowed to teach, let alone be paid for it. Said "teachers" are the cause of the drop in the status of teaching. If we, as a nation, could purge the teachers who are in schools only by seniority and tenure, and replace them with fresh, young minds to match the fresh, young minds of todays youth, we would find a profound increase in the quality of the overall schooling experience. A good teacher is all I ask, but will I get one?
Powerful argument. I didn't realize that 14 states prevent "laying off" teachers based on job performance. Wow. That does seem a no-brainer. I wonder how this compares to other industries. Do corporations follow this same rule?
ReplyDeleteOne counterclaim for you to consider: Are young teachers better than older teachers by virtue of their youth? While it may be true that some young teachers have fresh ideas, they also lack experience. Would it be wide to "purge" tenured teachers with "young minds"? It seems you assume to be "tenured" or to have "seniority" is to be a lower quality than a young teacher.
Let me clarify, the teachers I was referring to, are the teachers who don't perform as others, who only have their job b/c of how long they have been there. You even said yourself, the formula used for layoffs is almost solely based on how long the teacher has worked at Batesville, not the actual quality of the educator.
ReplyDeletePoint taken. Since this formula (years of teaching + level of education) is also the basis of determining a teacher's salary, should we rethink how teachers are paid? Should job performance be tied to pay--what some cal "merit pay"? Would this affect the status of teaching?
ReplyDelete