"a raft of research told us that test scores were hugely correlated to factors far beyond a teacher’s control. The effect is that a “good” teacher is one who’s been put in a classroom with high-scoring students, and a “bad” one is in a classroom with low-scoring students."
I experienced this first hand. I spent 8 years in a Title One school before the ten in a wealthy neighborhood where I presently teach. I could go on for pages describing the differences.
If it were all about the teacher... as present evaluation methods assume... there should have been no change in "my" scores when I moved schools. Student circumstance, ability, and predilections shouldn't matter. However, unsurprisingly, "my" scores got a good boost when I switched schools.
I enjoyed teaching at my Title One school. I knew a lot of amazing teachers there. But none of them stayed. It was not that teaching Title One kids was difficult... it was the score pressure. My admin and our district support staff literally believed that the reason our school did not score as well as our district's wealthy East-side schools was due to the teachers. As was stated by my admin and reading coach during a staff meeting where teachers were being blamed for low scores, "Backman students will start scoring like Bonneville students when Backman teachers start teaching like Bonneville teachers."
Well, after a few years of being browbeaten like that, I moved to one of our East-side schools. Apparently, that was all I needed to do to become a "good" teacher.
Underlying all of this is a misguided notion that students can be instructed into proficiency. Teachers are evaluated as if they are the only x-factor in student outcomes. This approach has nearly ruined the teaching profession in America. More troubling is that there is little will in our nation to change it.
No comments:
Post a Comment