Sometimes being a teacher sucks.....

[torinsmom]

So, a judge in NC has decided that some school systems are not doing as good a job as they should. He is having these school systems answer as to why many of their students are not "proficient" in reading. Some schools in my district will have to bring all their non-proficient students up to proficient level within three years, or the principal will be fired and the teachers will have to reapply for their jobs.

What he doesn't understand (and a lot of people do not understand) is that expecting all students to meet a level that has been determined to be the norm no matter what their home life, intellectual ability, or native language is just not fair to anyone. In my school, we have a low poverty rate, high parent involvement, and a low number of students with English as a second language. Most of our students are proficient. There are other schools in our district with a 67% poverty level, non-existent parent involvement and 30% ELL students. These schools also typically have lots of behavior problems. How can students starting out not even knowing how to speak English or recognize numbers 1-10 be as proficient as students who have been in preschool for 4 years and are reading and writing coming into kindergarten??? I feel bad for these teachers, because they are already doing their best, budgets have been cut once again, and they are fighting an uphill battle.

I think our education system needs to be seriously revamped. Instead of mandating that every child needs to meet this ambiguous level of proficiency, we should be looking at each child as an individual and looking at their GROWTH over each year. If little Johnny scores a 40% on an assessment, we should be using that assessment to see what we need to teach. Teach each child as an individual and then assess again. If the score is now a 50% and the norm is 70%, how can you say that is a failure? If little Johnny has shown 10% growth, that should be celebrated.

Sorry, just venting. This shouldn't affect me personally, but it bothers me......

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Respectfully--I see your point, but I'm also rather confused by it.

At what point did so many students in a sample b/c not proficient (i.e., which decade?) . I don't recall it being such a sticking point growing up, but it seems to be now.

I'd be curious as to the data of those schools now--compared to say 20 years ago. Is home life getting so much worse and making it difficult--or is it about the same percentage--but even more are not getting it than in the past?

Not sure if my drivel makes sense at 10pm at night--I know what I want to ask, but may not be asking it quite as well as I could.


Candidly--ever see that movie Summer School with Mark Harmon where the PE teacher has to teach English to a bunch of very poor students. The VP/Principal or whatever he was, set him up--by saying all the students had to pass. In the end, they all did not--but what the teacher did do, was to get them all to significantly improve.

That does seem to be a more valid way to judge teaching. Too bad a movie script came up with it in the 80s and it hasn't even come close to catching on just, yet.

 

[worm761]

I am so sorry. I live in Florida where they are trying to make teacher pay based on student performance. I think it is ridiculous. We have a middle school here that has a no fail policy. How are the teachers supposed to teach when the kids know the will NOT fail? I have watched a good kid stop caring about school because she will pass no matter what. And then guess what happens? These kids get to high school and know nothing! Now those poor teachers are stuck trying to teach what these kids should have learned the previous three years!!! I homeschool because the rules and schools around here have gotten beyond ridiculous. I feel so bad for teachers and have no idea why they do it. Good luck to you and all the other teachers out there.

 

[tasha99]

What a way to get teachers only wanting to teach in suburban, middle class schools with no English Language Learners! Horrible decision that penalizes teachers for taking a challenging job.

 

[barkley]

op-i hear you.

there was a school in the city we used to live in. it was constantly getting slammed by the state we lived in b/c their student's performance did'nt meet the criteria the state set. the district was constantly battling with the state b/c the school was unique (for that district compared to it's other schools), it served primarily esl kids who were first generation u.s. born. the parents did'nt have the skills to help the kids with studying even if they wanted to. last i heard that district had fought to get some other kind of performance criteria put in place (the REAL stats on how well those kids were improving was impressive).

when i student taught one of the placements was at a school that had the highest percentage of esl kids/greatest poverty level for the district the school was in. at that point there was funding available to schools to try and implement programs to tackle these issues. that school implemented a pilot program with huge success. they did outreach to the community and found that in the homes of their students the moms were the primary caregivers, but that the majority of the moms had no english reading/writing skills. they started a program where the moms could come to the school for a short amount of time during the school day (the school provided limited childcare for non school aged sibs) during which they received basic english reading and writing, and some math instruction. this had the result the school hoped for-the moms became able to help the kids with their schooling which resulted in greater successes for the kids. there was also an unanticipated result-the kids began helping their mom's with their homework which reinforced the kid's skills even more result in successes (when the school saw that some kids were doing MUCH better than others they looked to what the differences were between those kids and the others in the program, it was the ones who were not only receiving help from mom but were helping mom).


the schools my kids have gone to use the kind of method you propose. it's a private school system so they are'nt required by the state to do standardized testing but they have the kids do them at the begining of each school year. the results are then used to determine if individualy or an individual grade as a whole needs reinforcement or greater emphasis in a particular subject area. the school always has it's overall education plan set up well before the school year starts, but it's designed to be adaptable to the testing results. it seems to realy benefit the kids (and the teachers love it).

 

[Took]

op-i hear you.

there was a school in the city we used to live in. it was constantly getting slammed by the state we lived in b/c their student's performance did'nt meet the criteria the state set. the district was constantly battling with the state b/c the school was unique (for that district compared to it's other schools), it served primarily esl kids who were first generation u.s. born. the parents did'nt have the skills to help the kids with studying even if they wanted to. last i heard that district had fought to get some other kind of performance criteria put in place (the REAL stats on how well those kids were improving was impressive).

when i student taught one of the placements was at a school that had the highest percentage of esl kids/greatest poverty level for the district the school was in. at that point there was funding available to schools to try and implement programs to tackle these issues. that school implemented a pilot program with huge success. they did outreach to the community and found that in the homes of their students the moms were the primary caregivers, but that the majority of the moms had no english reading/writing skills. they started a program where the moms could come to the school for a short amount of time during the school day (the school provided limited childcare for non school aged sibs) during which they received basic english reading and writing, and some math instruction. this had the result the school hoped for-the moms became able to help the kids with their schooling which resulted in greater successes for the kids. there was also an unanticipated result-the kids began helping their mom's with their homework which reinforced the kid's skills even more result in successes (when the school saw that some kids were doing MUCH better than others they looked to what the differences were between those kids and the others in the program, it was the ones who were not only receiving help from mom but were helping mom).


the schools my kids have gone to use the kind of method you propose. it's a private school system so they are'nt required by the state to do standardized testing but they have the kids do them at the begining of each school year. the results are then used to determine if individualy or an individual grade as a whole needs reinforcement or greater emphasis in a particular subject area. the school always has it's overall education plan set up well before the school year starts, but it's designed to be adaptable to the testing results. it seems to realy benefit the kids (and the teachers love it).

I LOVE the idea of including the parents in the educational process, particularly of ESL students. My experiences indicate that most parents of ESL students would embrace such a chance if childcare (even for an hour or so) were provided. THey want their children to learn English and to prosper here. That's why they're in the USA in the first place.

I agree also with the poster above who says we need to look at individuals, not statistics. As a 20-year instructor in the two-year college environment, I have learned that "one size fits all" is a poor approach to real education (although it makes the number -crunchers feel good, obviously).

 

[torinsmom]

Respectfully--I see your point, but I'm also rather confused by it.

At what point did so many students in a sample b/c not proficient (i.e., which decade?) . I don't recall it being such a sticking point growing up, but it seems to be now.

I'd be curious as to the data of those schools now--compared to say 20 years ago. Is home life getting so much worse and making it difficult--or is it about the same percentage--but even more are not getting it than in the past?

Not sure if my drivel makes sense at 10pm at night--I know what I want to ask, but may not be asking it quite as well as I could.


Candidly--ever see that movie Summer School with Mark Harmon where the PE teacher has to teach English to a bunch of very poor students. The VP/Principal or whatever he was, set him up--by saying all the students had to pass. In the end, they all did not--but what the teacher did do, was to get them all to significantly improve.

That does seem to be a more valid way to judge teaching. Too bad a movie script came up with it in the 80s and it hasn't even come close to catching on just, yet.

This has been an ongoing thing in certain school districts in our state. In my opinion, it has very little to do with lack of good leadership in the affected schools. First, it has to do with the tests. They are not based on the norms in school districts that have a high poverty and non-English speaking population. My son is not either of those things and he has had trouble passing the math EOG test. The expectations are unrealistic. In addition, the information they give teachers to prepare students for the test is not even accurate. For example, last year the 3rd grade test prep books covered multiplying four numbers by two numbers. Come test time, there were problems multiplying four numbers by four numbers!

Secondly, it has to do with the population. With respect, you couldn't pay me enough to teach in some of these schools. It is like teaching in a prison. Some of these kids are from homes where fists and curse words are used to communicate. Some don't get anything to eat between lunch on Fridays and breakfast on Mondays. Some are allowed to go to school when they want; we are talking 1-2 days a week or come in late every day. You have gangs starting up in elementary school and yes, heavy security in a school that is K-2. It is not even logical to think you can bring these kids up to the states' idea of proficiency.

Yes, we need to make sure every child is learning and growing. Yes, we need to make sure that every child has the same opportunity and resources for their education. We can affect what happens at school. We simply can't control what happens at home. And truthfully, I don't think a teacher should be fired if they can show they have brought about growth in their students, even if some kids haven't made it to "proficient" by state standards.

Thank goodness I am at a school where my kids WANT to learn and their parents are onboard to encourage them and help us. With such a low poverty rate, those kids that need extra help are doing well, because they are in the minority. If more than half the kids were in that state, there is no way one teacher could bring 28 kids(including 14 with high need) up to proficiency. JMHO

Marsha

By the way, this is Durham Public Schools in North Carolina. I don't have the stats for years past, but I am sure they can be found by someone who has more time.

 

[java]

I would like to see teachers evaluated on a more cases specific basis. I think it's unfair to have a blanket requirement for all schools - because all situations are different. And I agree that it would only discourage teachers from teaching in a low income,esl school.

I do think though that not all teachers are wonderful. There are many that are- but the same way that you can't blanket the students - you can't blanket the teachers.
In our district there is a math issue when they get to 6th grade- state test scores go down and students struggle. There is 1 math teacher. She is a terrible teacher imho. For example- she incorrectly taught a lesson. I saw my daughter doing it an improper way and I corrected her. She argued that her teacher taught her that way. I showed her my way and we tried a few problems and she got them correct. The next day on the test she was the only student to get a 100 on it- why? Because they all did the test the way the teacher taught them and it was WRONG! But she is tenured. So she's not going anyplace. That is a concern of mine. I think teachers like that only hurt all the wonderful teachers at my school. She is taking their money IMHO.

 

[luvsJack]

So, a judge in NC has decided that some school systems are not doing as good a job as they should. He is having these school systems answer as to why many of their students are not "proficient" in reading. Some schools in my district will have to bring all their non-proficient students up to proficient level within three years, or the principal will be fired and the teachers will have to reapply for their jobs.

What he doesn't understand (and a lot of people do not understand) is that expecting all students to meet a level that has been determined to be the norm no matter what their home life, intellectual ability, or native language is just not fair to anyone. In my school, we have a low poverty rate, high parent involvement, and a low number of students with English as a second language. Most of our students are proficient. There are other schools in our district with a 67% poverty level, non-existent parent involvement and 30% ELL students. These schools also typically have lots of behavior problems. How can students starting out not even knowing how to speak English or recognize numbers 1-10 be as proficient as students who have been in preschool for 4 years and are reading and writing coming into kindergarten??? I feel bad for these teachers, because they are already doing their best, budgets have been cut once again, and they are fighting an uphill battle.

I think our education system needs to be seriously revamped. Instead of mandating that every child needs to meet this ambiguous level of proficiency, we should be looking at each child as an individual and looking at their GROWTH over each year. If little Johnny scores a 40% on an assessment, we should be using that assessment to see what we need to teach. Teach each child as an individual and then assess again. If the score is now a 50% and the norm is 70%, how can you say that is a failure? If little Johnny has shown 10% growth, that should be celebrated.

Sorry, just venting. This shouldn't affect me personally, but it bothers me......

Just on the bolded part. Wasn't the point of kindergarten to give all the students an equal footing (as equal as it can be) going into first grade? Our school doesn't have a lot of kids coming in not knowing how to speak English, but I know they always has a lot of K students coming in that have never even picked up a crayon much less know how to write their name. I would have assumed that K would be designed to start where this kid is, not with the one that has been in preschool for several years. And in that, I certainly would have thought that the testing would be set up so that the starting point at entering K is 0 knowledge and is built on from that point. (here the kids don't start testing until 3rd grade but still it should be 3rd grade proficiency based on a 0 starting point in K, not a starting point of after 3 years in preschool). Of course a child who has never been exposed to any type of learning environment by age 5 is not going to test as high as the child who was exposed on a constant bases, but a score of proficient should not be based on the exposure a child had before starting public school

I don't think state/standardized testing should be used to evaluate students much less teachers. There does need to be evaluation of the teachers but not standardized tests.

 

[Christine]

This a problem everywhere and I agree that, teachers in general, are not to blame but they seemed to get blamed.

I live in the DC metro area. The DC public schools and the Prince Georges' County school system in Maryland have been the *worst* for years. Their spending per student is the highest of most of the neighboring areas.

What it comes down to is that a large percentage of these students come from broken homes, live in poverty, have terrible crime-ridden neighborhoods they must contend with, and have families that probably don't value education all that much. How in the heck is a teacher supposed to work with THAT? Not 30 miles away from these awful school systems are the Fairfax, Mongtomery, and Howard County School Systems which are ranked very high nationally. Most of these students come from great homes, high income, and from families that value higher education. I'm betting that the actual curriculum between the good and the bad schools doesn't differ all that much to account for the dramatic performance differences. Nope, not buying it. It is socioeconomics.

Even given that, though, I think these students must all still be held to a the same education standards. I don't think they are though as I've seen some of the kids that make it through the awful schools systems and it's obvious they were pushed through to get them out.

I don't know what the answer is but it's certainly not right to put it wholly on the teachers.

 

[golfgal]

Perhaps that judge should volunteer at the bad schools for a few weeks to see what really goes on in school. Maybe the judge should attend parent/teacher conferences and find out how many parents actually show up, maybe that judge should also require parents to get an education along with their child so they can help their child succeed--just some thoughts.

 

[Colleen27]

Just on the bolded part. Wasn't the point of kindergarten to give all the students an equal footing (as equal as it can be) going into first grade? Our school doesn't have a lot of kids coming in not knowing how to speak English, but I know they always has a lot of K students coming in that have never even picked up a crayon much less know how to write their name. I would have assumed that K would be designed to start where this kid is, not with the one that has been in preschool for several years. And in that, I certainly would have thought that the testing would be set up so that the starting point at entering K is 0 knowledge and is built on from that point.

That used to be the case, as recently as just one generation ago, but that's not the case any more. In our old district, the expectation is that kindergartners will come in with certain basic skills, knowing the alphabet and counting to 10, how to write their names, etc. And they're held back if they aren't reading on a basic level at the end of K.

Pre-K is the 0 knowledge level now (and pre-K isn't free so poor kids seldom attend), and K is heavily academic. It is a horrible system that sets disadvantaged kids and "late bloomers" up to fail because they just aren't capable of everything that is expected of them, but the schools feel this is the way to get ahead of the testing game.

 

[golfgal]

That used to be the case, as recently as just one generation ago, but that's not the case any more. In our old district, the expectation is that kindergartners will come in with certain basic skills, knowing the alphabet and counting to 10, how to write their names, etc. And they're held back if they aren't reading on a basic level at the end of K.

Pre-K is the 0 knowledge level now (and pre-K isn't free so poor kids seldom attend), and K is heavily academic. It is a horrible system that sets disadvantaged kids and "late bloomers" up to fail because they just aren't capable of everything that is expected of them, but the schools feel this is the way to get ahead of the testing game.

Doesn't your state have free preschool for low income people? What about Head Start? In Minnesota they have a program called Early Childhood Family Eduction (ECFE). It is for families with kids age zero-kindergarten. They are mostly parenting classes but while the parents are off discussing parenting issues the children are doing various activities with certified teachers. The classes are free for low income families but they are mostly attended by middle and upper class people. There is also a preschool program incorporated into the program. I find that there are all kinds of opportunities for low income families to get their child on track, they just don't take advantage of them. I guess if you are too lazy to get a job or see that your child is fed, you aren't going to get them to preschool either.

 

[SpecialK]

Respectfully--I see your point, but I'm also rather confused by it.

At what point did so many students in a sample b/c not proficient (i.e., which decade?) . I don't recall it being such a sticking point growing up, but it seems to be now.

I'd be curious as to the data of those schools now--compared to say 20 years ago. Is home life getting so much worse and making it difficult--or is it about the same percentage--but even more are not getting it than in the past?

Not sure if my drivel makes sense at 10pm at night--I know what I want to ask, but may not be asking it quite as well as I could.


Candidly--ever see that movie Summer School with Mark Harmon where the PE teacher has to teach English to a bunch of very poor students. The VP/Principal or whatever he was, set him up--by saying all the students had to pass. In the end, they all did not--but what the teacher did do, was to get them all to significantly improve.

That does seem to be a more valid way to judge teaching. Too bad a movie script came up with it in the 80s and it hasn't even come close to catching on just, yet.

It used to be that all test results were lumped in together. Now the school population is divided into sub-groups and all of the sub-groups have to pass or your school can be put on a watch list. Not that easy to accomplish if a couple of your sub-groups are not proficient in English.

Hang in there,OP. Rumor has it that NCLB is going to be revamped and that the determining factor will be progress rather than passing a certain standard.

 

[iwrbnd]

I am so sorry. I live in Florida where they are trying to make teacher pay based on student performance. I think it is ridiculous. We have a middle school here that has a no fail policy. How are the teachers supposed to teach when the kids know the will NOT fail? I have watched a good kid stop caring about school because she will pass no matter what. And then guess what happens? These kids get to high school and know nothing! Now those poor teachers are stuck trying to teach what these kids should have learned the previous three years!!! I homeschool because the rules and schools around here have gotten beyond ridiculous. I feel so bad for teachers and have no idea why they do it. Good luck to you and all the other teachers out there.

I'm a teacher and I completely understand how ridiculous this is! It's also going to make teachers not want to teach in "lower" schools. That is sad because some teachers have a passion for those kids but thinking you might lose your job every year will make them stay away from those schools.

Did you all know they are starting this with doctors, too? They will get paid on how the patients outcome it. My DH is a physician and he says it's ridiculous for them, too. You can't make everyone healthy no matter how good a physician you are. What it will do is make doctors only accept the healthier patients and those hard to treat ones will be without a doctor. All of this is insane.

 

[jillyb]

Torinsmom I agree with you 100%!!!! This whole ridiculous state testing and all the other hoops that educators have to jump through is a result of the very bad law called "No Child Left Behind". Get rid of that law and let teachers teach!

 

[Colleen27]

Doesn't your state have free preschool for low income people? What about Head Start? In Minnesota they have a program called Early Childhood Family Eduction (ECFE). It is for families with kids age zero-kindergarten. They are mostly parenting classes but while the parents are off discussing parenting issues the children are doing various activities with certified teachers. The classes are free for low income families but they are mostly attended by middle and upper class people. There is also a preschool program incorporated into the program. I find that there are all kinds of opportunities for low income families to get their child on track, they just don't take advantage of them. I guess if you are too lazy to get a job or see that your child is fed, you aren't going to get them to preschool either.

Yeah there is Head Start, which is a great program for those who qualify assuming they can/will take advantage of it, and a more play-oriented program through the county university extension. I don't think either program reaches nearly as many kids as need it, though, because of logistical issues (transportation, childcare, etc.) or plain out laziness/lack of desire on the part of some parents. And of course the challenges vary from place to place - a low-income rural family working opposite shifts to get by with one car and no childcare is going to have different obstacles to taking advantage of what is offered than a poor urban family where the adult in the home just doesn't value education enough to sign the kids up.

 

[golfgal]

Yeah there is Head Start, which is a great program for those who qualify assuming they can/will take advantage of it, and a more play-oriented program through the county university extension. I don't think either program reaches nearly as many kids as need it, though, because of logistical issues (transportation, childcare, etc.) or plain out laziness/lack of desire on the part of some parents. And of course the challenges vary from place to place - a low-income rural family working opposite shifts to get by with one car and no childcare is going to have different obstacles to taking advantage of what is offered than a poor urban family where the adult in the home just doesn't value education enough to sign the kids up.

Headstart provides door to door transportation.

 

[golfgal]

Here is another example of why something needs to be done with PARENTS before the kids are going to succeed in school:

When our twins were toddlers we took them to the ECFE classes I described earlier. Our parent educator was telling us a story about a woman in his "high risk" group (these are parents that were court ordered to take the classes). She was asking for help as to how to get her 2 month old to sleep. They gave her lots of advice. Well the instructor ran into her out shopping one day, she was giving the baby a bottle of MOUNTAIN DEW. He asked her, as diplomatically as possible, why. She answered that "he likes it" . He suggested not giving the baby Mountain Dew any longer and left. Well, she shows up to class all proud of herself because she switched to Coke . How on EARTH are teachers supposed to overcome this type of upbringing?

 

[luvsJack]

That used to be the case, as recently as just one generation ago, but that's not the case any more. In our old district, the expectation is that kindergartners will come in with certain basic skills, knowing the alphabet and counting to 10, how to write their names, etc. And they're held back if they aren't reading on a basic level at the end of K.

Pre-K is the 0 knowledge level now (and pre-K isn't free so poor kids seldom attend), and K is heavily academic. It is a horrible system that sets disadvantaged kids and "late bloomers" up to fail because they just aren't capable of everything that is expected of them, but the schools feel this is the way to get ahead of the testing game.

That is not fair, imho. When I was an assistant teacher for K, we had kids that would have qualified for Head Start but there was not way for them to get there. And head start in this state does not have transportation, its going to be different from state to state.

If a child has never picked up a crayon or a pencil they cannot possible start off knowing how to write!

Besides, preschools and head start just are not equal enough. In our state, any child care center is required to have a teaching program for all ages. So any center can be called a "preschool", but some of these "teaching" programs consist of watching Barney all day and doing a few color sheets. There is no curriculum that is required of a preschool/head start.