Public schools are extremely political institutions. Only one person, the principal, has the power to destroy teachers' careers, and he or she can do this rather easily. The "reformers" don't know or simply don't care about the extreme power imbalance between principals and teachers, which is greater than any other supervisor/employee relationship. As I have said repeatedly, losing your job as a teacher is like an attorney being disbarred. It damages your career, and any principal can ruin it for any reason.
No one person should have that kind of power. "Peer review" might be better, but then again you are looking at a possible clash of teaching philosophies, philosophies which may work for one teacher with one class may not work for another teacher with a different class or may even vary from year to year depending on the classroom dynamics.
Snip from article:
Commenting on the use of standardized test scores to judge teachers, the head of the Superintendent's Association, Joseph Cirasuolo, admitted: "the science is not all there ... That doesn't mean we shouldn't try this."
No, it shouldn't be tried. Schools aren't businesses, and teaching "effectiveness" cannot be objectively measured or quantified. Student performance depends on many other factors besides whether the teacher is "effective."
Of course, the "effective teacher" propaganda is simply an excuse to turn teaching into a Mickey D.'s job with high turnover and no benefits and to turn schools into private, for-profit entities.
No comments:
Post a Comment