Teacher World

Teachers, how many of you have a smartboard? If you do, I think that you would find a recent article in neatoday, “Do Smartboards Make Smart Students?” very interesting.

I feel very fortunate to have a smartboard in my classroom, and I use it almost daily for one activity or another. I have found that even the most reluctant students can’t wait to go to the smartboard to write or complete an activity. And the internet has a plethora of awesome websites with fun, interesting, and interactive ways to reinforce any curriculum. As a result, my students are always highly engaged when we use the smartboard, and I can hook them even more if I use it in conjunction with our Senteo Clickers. So, why is Rosita Force, the author of this article, questioning the use of smartboards and their impact on classroom learning?

You’ve seen it in your building, I’m sure. There are always those teachers who don’t utilize smartboards as they should, and use them instead as glorified overheads, chalkboards, and movie projector screens. Now, the article is quick to point out, and I’m sure we would all agree, that occasional use of smartboards in this way is okay. But the problem occurs when this is the main way they are being utilized. The beauty and magic of this type of technology is its connectivity to the internet and to interactive software. If a teacher cannot or will not use them in this way, it is a waste of money and a waste of students’ time.

Additionally Ms. Force states that sometimes we may be overusing technology when our real focus should be on creating “an environment that makes students want to work together to solve problems in a creative and innovative manner.” Her point is that teachers need to be learning facilitators rather than just the deliverer of knowledge. She suggests in closing that we need to sometimes “power down the technology to let students power up their problem-solving skills”.  And this is a valid point. As teachers, we must avoid the mundane routines, and be ready to experiment in our classroom with new techniques and new methods. We need to teach our children to use educational technology but also teach them to be problem solvers in a real world. And that is something that cannot be taught through a smartboard.

So, use those smartboards and other purchased technology to teach your children about the world around them and to get them to interact with the skills you teach, but don’t overuse them. At the same time, provide ample opportunity for them to manipulate ideas and concepts in practical problem-solving activities. Remember, our goal as teachers is to produce well-rounded learners who can apply the concepts and skills they have acquired to real-life situations, real-life jobs, and real-life problems.

It’s all about the proper balance in our teaching strategies.

Changes in Teaching, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog, teaching strategies NEA, Senteo clickers, smartboards, students, teachers, technology

Over the next few blogs, I ask for your indulgence as I write about some very interesting articles which appeared in the latest neatoday magazine (August/September 2010). This first blog pertains to an article that appeared regarding merit pay.

This short article was entitled “Merit Pay Myths”, and it focused on whether merit pay has been proven to increase student test scores or student achievement. The prevailing belief by supporters of merit pay is that the promise of bonuses or increased salaries will inspire teachers to work more diligently to get their students to perform at the levels that are necessary to show academic excellence, particularly as evidenced by higher test scores. One of the assumptions that those who advocate the need for merit pay make, in my opinion erroneously, is that teachers are inspired by the higher pay check, and will not work as diligently without holding out that carrot. Let’s get real for a moment! If teachers were inspired by a higher pay check, they would never have entered the teaching profession, which is notorious for being an underpaid vocation. Am I right?

Another issue I have always had with merit pay is that at a time when school systems everywhere are being asked to engage in collaboration and mentoring to improve student performance, which involves utilizing and sharing each other’s effective techniques, I believe merit pay could lead to a completely different outcome. I fear the tendency for some teachers who are highly effective in their teaching strategies and therefore receiving merit pay, might be to guard their strategies so as to guarantee continued monetary rewards, thus leading to competition rather than collaboration. I have argued against merit pay for these and other reasons.

So, what did the latest study completed by Mathematica Policy Research find? According to this article, these researchers looked at Chicago’s Teacher Advancement Project, which has been operating for three years now getting its money from the federal Teacher Incentive Fund, and they found that merit pay “had no impact on test scores or teacher retention rates”. Over three years and no improvement? Does that seem like good news for merit pay advocates? The article concludes by saying, “In its defense, federal officials said they ‘can’t expect immediate results’.” Okay, but shouldn’t there be some improvement after three years? It just leaves me wondering: how many years does it take before merit pay pays off?

Educational Reform, Merit Pay for Teachers, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog merit pay, NEA, teachers

Now that school is over for the year and I have more time to contemplate what to look forward to in educational reform, here it is, as promised, but with a slight twist. I was going to write about what I thought was a more positive approach to Ohio’s round two RttT application, but upon deeper reading and rereading of the first application, I am feeling  some trepidation. Let me see if I can explain myself better.

When our school system was in the decision-making stage for round two trying to determine whether we wanted to jump on board, our union sent us a list of reasons to support or oppose the participation of local schools in round two. When I read the first statement of support, I was initially enthusiastic. Here it is: “Each participating LEA will develop its own (teacher) evaluation model. Districts, in partnership with their local unions, will develop evaluation systems that meet the criteria outlined in the preliminary scope of work. The Educator Standards Board is developing a model evaluation framework that districts may choose to use…(RTTT - Phase II Information and Clarifying Points, 2010)”

Yes, I thought! They are going to let local school systems work with their unions to come up with a fair way to evaluate teachers. Then I read a little closer, and got snagged on these tiny little words: “that meet the criteria outlined in the preliminary scope of work”. Hum…What does that mean? So I went back to the original RttT summary, and then I got really concerned. Here is what I read: “ODE will collaborate with LEAs and teachers unions to develop a teacher evaluation model that includes annual evaluations, provides timely and constructive feedback, includes student growth as a significant factor-”. And that’s where I stop. Now, let me be clear. I totally agree that we should be responsible as teachers to show student growth, that is, after all, why we are there, but if that growth is going to be solely or even partially measured by state achievement tests, I have a problem with RttT.

Don’t get me wrong! Measure student progress, by all means! That should be part of a teacher’s evaluation. But do it in a variety of ways. Make common formative assessments which can be administered regularly. Use these to chart student progress, and use these results for grade level collaboration, mentoring, and planning. Establish grade level teams where teachers work together to study those assessment results in order to better facilitate student progress, and let teachers’ willingness to work together on these teams be another important aspect of teacher evaluation. And there are so many other worthy factors in determining teacher effectiveness. But never, never base my effectiveness as a teacher on one test for which students have no ownership. And without the new summary for Ohio’s RttT round two in front of me, I have no idea what criterion will be proposed to determine student progress. Hence, I have legitimate misgivings and concerns.

So I appreciate the OEA who clearly stated: “Although student outcomes can be considered as one of several criteria for assessing the practice of teachers and principals, OEA believes as most researchers do that the use of student outcomes as the primary indicator of success is inappropriate to achieve the desired result of a valid, fair and robust educator evaluation system.” Now this is language I can agree with! What about you?

Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog, state achievement tests, teacher evaluations ODE, RttT, state achievement tests, teacher evaluations

Well, here we go again! Our union president emailed union members recently asking us to decide whether we wanted to be a part of Phase 2: Race to the Top. This time, the information was clearer and there was no doubt what we were deciding on, but here’s the catch: we had only five days to read the information, consider the pros and cons, and make a decision. Considering what is at stake and the time of year, could we not have had more time to weigh our options before a decision had to be made? I just don’t get it!

Our email contained several quite detailed pieces of information to be read prior to completing a survey stating our intent. So why just five days to make an informed decision? This time of year is extremely busy. As we all try to cover everything that must be covered before the end of the year and deal with the constant interruptions to our schedule which always seem to occur after achievement tests have been taken, it is difficult to fit anything more into an already jam-packed schedule. I confess that I found it impossible to make an educated choice on such an important topic in such a limited period of time with everything else I had to do. Apparently I was not alone, as there was minimal response to the email, which tells me that either people felt as overwhelmed as I did, or they still don’t understand the impact that Race to the Top might have on all of us. Frankly, this is a shame. As I read through the information we received, I was encouraged by several positive statements regarding the plans for this new phase. (I will be more specific about these items in a future blog.) So it angers me that we had so little time to read and reflect before having to commit one way or the other.

I don’t know if this was a common problem in other districts or unique to ours. Regardless, since our district clearly felt the crunch and did not respond in time, we are going to be bystanders once again in this process. I just hope we don’t regret our lack of decision in the future.

Educational Reform, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog LEAs, Race to the Top, teacher reform, unions

Ohio’s application for the phase 1 portion of Race to the Top was soundly rejected and may be again in phase 2 unless the writers are able to make some major changes to the application. Ohio teachers are probably wondering why it was rejected, and what kind of changes need to be made. Well, let me tell you what I have been able to learn.

First of all, each portion of the application received points, which when totaled, determined which states would be the recipients of RttT resources. According to my research, the area in which Ohio scored lowest (second to the lowest of the 16 finalist states) was in the area called “Great Teachers and Leaders”. Apparently, Ohio’s application was too wimpy due to “the state’s inability to ensure equitable distribution of teachers in hard-to-staff subjects, specialty areas, or in high-poverty or high-minority schools”, according to The Ohio Education Gadfly. Reviewers felt that the process it would take to remove ineffective educators was not clearly provided. There was also criticism due to the fact that only half of the local schools who participated in the phase 1 application process agreed to link teacher evaluations to their compensation and promotion. Some of the other areas of concern were its failure to adequately detail how it would close achievement gaps between poor students and wealthier students, and how it would turnaround the lowest-performing schools.

Now what does this mean for Phase 2? Well, first of all, if Ohio has any hope of being considered, it will need to develop stronger guidelines regarding merit pay, tenure, and dismissal of teachers. And you can rest assured that all of these will be linked to a large degree on achievement test scores. One source I read stated that RttT approved heartily of states like Florida, where the legislature approved teacher salaries being tied directly to test scores, and teachers would be offered one year salaries only. (Although, as I have previously blogged, this was later overturned by Florida’s governor.) Clearly, this is indicative of what the judges are looking for.

Secondly, Ohio will have to state more clearly how teachers would be evenly redistributed so as to level the playing field between low income and higher income school districts in order to turnaround lowest-performing schools. In other words, they are looking for stronger language regarding how highly effective teachers could be moved.

Additionally, Ohio’s application lacked teeth when it came to teachers unions. From what I have been able to glean, RttT reviewers are looking for a firm commitment by unions to be willing to make pretty radical changes to teacher salary, licensure, evaluation, tenure, and termination.

These are some of the salient reasons why Ohio’s application was rejected. I will continue to keep you informed and, of course, give my opinions about upcoming information as it becomes available. In the meantime, I hope you take the time to comment about what you have heard or read, and how you feel about Race to the Top, no matter which state you are from.

Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Merit Pay for Teachers, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog, state achievement tests low income schools, merit pay, Phase One, Race to the Top, teacher licensure, teacher tenure, Teacher's Unions, turnaround schools

First, I am curious to know how many of you out there even knew about Race to the Top. I think it was one of the best kept secrets. And I’m not sure why that would be the case. This should be a good thing, right? So why wasn’t there more publicity about it?

The only reason I knew anything about RttT was because I am always searching the internet for important education news that might be interesting to blog about. So I read about it quite awhile ago and blogged about my excitement that possibly, for the first time, the Department of Education was going to get it right, since one of the goals was to align the math and reading standards nationally from elementary school up to college. I was very excited about the prospect of common standards and what that could mean for teachers. Aside from that, I heard nothing about RttT. We received no information at our schools about it. Such an important venture that would involve school systems throughout our state, and we were never adequately informed? I don’t get it!

A few months ago, we got an email from our union president asking us if we wanted to be a part of this plan. The first problem I had with this was that it was hard to commit to a plan that you had never seen. One of our concerns was that it might involve merit pay, something most of us do not support, and that it also might interfere with the union and its rights. Due to these issues, we voted down the opportunity to participate in this contest. But, admittedly, I don’t think most of us even realized that what we were turning down was the Race to the Top. I didn’t connect the two events either because it wasn’t expressed clearly in the email.

Recently, I explained to some of my co-teachers what we had turned down and what it means for our careers. That will be the topic of a future blog, but my point in this blog is this: why was the opportunity to be involved in educational reform, which is supposed to be so important, so poorly explained and why was there so little publicity? Every school system in participating states should have been showered with information about Race to the Top long before we were ever asked to take a vote. Additionally, it seems ridiculous to sign on to a plan that you have never seen. The order seems convoluted. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to study the proposal before committing to it? Am I crazy or does it feel a little like a trap to you? Would you ever sign a legal document that would affect your future without reading it over first?

I am hoping that before states enter into Phase 2, some of these issues will be ironed out and school systems will be better equipped to make the decision to either accept or decline the opportunity to be involved in Race to the Top. We will just have to wait and see.

I am also curious how many of you who are reading this are in a school system which is currently participating in Race to the Top. Please let us know, and tell us how you were informed about RttT,

Educational Reform, Merit Pay for Teachers, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog Department of Education, Educational Reform, Race to the Top, teacher unions

Okay, by now we’ve all read about it and seen news reports about it, but it continues to shock me as I consider all of the ramifications of the recent firings of all teachers in a poorly performing school in Rhode Island. As educators, we need to watch what is happening very carefully because clearly, this is coming down the pike for other schools as well. Here are some of my thoughts about what happened.

First, I find it ludicrous to buy into the philosophy that the answer to turning around ineffective schools is to fire all of the teachers in a building. Are we serious? Do we really not get the fact that the main reasons these schools are ineffective is because of their environment; the poverty, the crime, the drug and alcohol abuse, the gang violence, and myriad other factors that make more than just the schools ineffective. How do teachers get students to care about test results when they are wondering where their next meal is coming from, whether they will get beat up on their way home from school, if they will be the victim of robbery, assault, rape, or a drive-by shooting? We all watch the news. We know the prevalence of crime in these high poverty areas. Isn’t that what needs to be resolved? How will shutting down a school help solve crime and poverty; clearly roadblocks to achievement in school? And how much parental support do many of the students in these schools get? Is education a priority in these homes? How do teachers educate children who place no value on education because their parents don’t? Don’t get me wrong, I know there are many hard-working, good parents in these areas who are pushing their children to succeed, but it doesn’t change the simple truth that environment is a critical issue.

Second, is the school board in Central Falls really trying to tell us that all of the teachers on that staff were ineffective? There were no teachers on their staff worthy of retaining their jobs? While I am sure that there were teachers who were burned out and just going through the motions (which is somewhat understandable given the atmosphere in which they teach), it is beyond my ability to grasp the idiocy of lumping all teachers in that school together as incompetent. Mark my words, there were teachers on that staff who were battling against factors we cannot begin to imagine trying to elevate their students out of the environment they live in by providing them with the tools a good education would give them. How dare this board of education tell them that because the test scores have been very low, they are under qualified and do not deserve jobs! Again, when does environment take the blame? And shame on the superintendent of this school for not taking stopgap measures along the way to avoid this bloodbath. She bears equal responsibility since it is her school, and she ultimately determines who gets hired and what their credentials are. Why isn’t she being fired as well for not doing her job more effectively?

Finally, in the New York Times article reporting on the firings in Rhode Island, it was reported that Frances Gallo, the school’s superintendent, originally planned to extend the instructional hours and make additional changes to turn this school around but decided to fire all of the teachers when the union fought for extra pay for the additional 25 minutes to the teacher work day. Okay, I understand being annoyed, but is this taking it a little too far? Surely, some intermediary steps could have been agreed upon. The article goes on to say that Dr. Gallo later agreed to the possibility of hiring back some of these teachers, but she and the union could not reach an agreement. It makes me want to scream! Careers are at stake here, and an agreement cannot be reached? Preposterous! 

Needless to say, I am befuddled and angry over this decision. But the final straw for me is that President Obama supports it and applauds it. This was just the start, ladies and gentlemen. So, what that tells me is that we all need to fasten our seatbelts because it’s going to be a bumpy ride!

Changes in Teaching, High Caliber Schools, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog, state achievement tests President Obama, Rhode Island schools, Teacher's Unions, turnaround schools

After spending quite some time reading a variety of articles both for and against the issue of merit pay for teachers, I feel, as all teachers should, the need to weigh-in on this important issue. Especially as President Barack Obama plugged teacher bonuses based on student achievement in the first education policy speech of his presidency.

We all know that in education, as in any profession, there are employees who produce average work with average to little success, and are unmotivated to do much more. A common fallacy in the teaching profession is that it is predominately the veteran teachers who fit this scenario as they have become burned out and are simply waiting to retire. While I do not deny that I have seen my fair share of this condition, I must also adamantly state that this attitude has no age requirement. I have seen the same attitude in teachers fresh out of college, and some who have a few years under their belt. In teaching, as in any profession, our labor force ranges from the dedicated, hard-working, and tireless to the “I’ll-do-the-bare-minimum”, and various stages in between. The difference between the business and education world is that our teachers’ unions, which protect us in a multitude of important ways making our work places fairer and safer places to work, also do our profession the disservice of fighting to protect teachers, both young and old, who legitimately deserve to be let go. In the business world, job retention is directly related to job performance. If our unions did not work so diligently to protect teachers whose performance necessitated their being weeded out, does it not stand to reason that we would be left with a higher caliber of teachers who, by that very definition, are all deserving of merit pay?

I propose that unions should establish strict and multi-layered guidelines for teacher dismissal and should ensure that these guidelines are followed to the letter. But when thorough documentation proves a teacher’s unwillingness or inability to take the necessary steps to improve their teaching skills after a methodical, multifaceted evaluation process established by the union, it becomes counterproductive and hurts a school system when its union fights for that teacher. Allowing the administration to release these teachers from their contract would ultimately create a higher caliber school system which encourages respect from the community and makes it far more likely for these community members to support levies that pay all teachers in these schools the salary they deserve.

Changes in Teaching, Funding Education, High Caliber Schools, Teacher Education, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog job performance, job retention, merit pay, Obama's education policy, school levies, teacher evaluation, teacher salary, Teacher's Unions, veteran teachers