There is already the bullshit National Board Certification, whereby teachers spend thousands of dollars to get it and where good teachers "fail" the "rigorous" exam while lousy ones pass with flying colors.
Sixty-seven of the 68 students studying to be teachers at the middle and high school levels at the Amherst campus are protesting a new national licensure procedure being developed by Stanford University with the education company Pearson.
The UMass students say that their professors and the classroom teachers who observe them for six months in real school settings can do a better job judging their skills than a corporation that has never seen them.
They have refused to send Pearson two 10-minute videos of themselves teaching, as well as a 40-page take-home test, requirements of an assessment that will soon be necessary for licensure in several states.
“This is something complex and we don’t like seeing it taken out of human hands,” said Barbara Madeloni, who runs the university’s high school teacher training program. “We are putting a stick in the gears.”
You're already evaluated to the ying-yang when you go into a teacher education program through practicums and student teaching. No outside firm is necessary to duplicate the process.
Michael Winerip of the New York Times can always be counted on to tell the truth about public education and the privatization movement:
As for the idea that having an independent licensing test like California’s will improve the public’s opinion of teachers — no way. Politicians and businesspeople bash teachers in sunny California as much as they do in cloudy states. There is a whole education industry that is flourishing because it is built on the denigration of public schoolteachers.
Several states have already decided to let Pearson do this shit.
Some audio about this controversy with Pearson:
Education Radio
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment