Praxis is for initial cert or adding endorsements, not for ongoing Evals.
Believe it or not, I've taken the Praxis, so I understand that. My point was that the analogy to oncologists is absurd because they are constantly, rigorously, and objectively evaluated. They take a four-part licensing exam (which I guess would theoretically be the parallel to the Praxis despite the enormous difference in degree of difficulty), they then take a two part board certification exam with a written and an oral section. The test is a two-day test. They have to re-take this test every ten years. Every time they apply for privileges, they are re-evaluated including providing lists and lists of patient outcome information and procedures performed and suits against them, and privileges at other hospitals... I mean, I could go on here, but oncologists are evaluated in a way teachers would NEVER want to submit to. And maybe they shouldn't even have to. But if fallbride wants to go out on a limb with her "but oncologists" she should understand that (a) they are evaluated on patient outcomes and (b) they are evaluated in a ton of other objective ways that teachers aren't.
I don't want to be shanked, but I am fine with doctors being heavily tested as it is life and death. I think teachers need to be evaluated. And reevaluated for sure, but I am not thinking it needs to be as rigorous as an md.
I haven't paid enough attention as to why the Ontario teachers are currently pissed off - I do know a strike was averted though.
What was the issue? Something about contracts?
Oh, it's actually mostly about stripping collective bargaining rights. The government is essentially taking away our right to bargain. Their definition of 'bargaining' is giving us their offer and saying that's it, no actual bargaining. And they are circumventing the Ontario Labour Relations Act by going straight to the Legislature. In terms of sticking points in the offer, the strips to our contract are fairly huge. The media keeps portraying it as us not wanting a pay freeze. That's not what it is at all but it's hard to argue with the general public about anything related to teaching, they mostly think we are over paid and underworked. I have given up trying to provide my perspective.
I can see both sides (I posted earlier in the thread). i have close friends in the field whose spouses are realtors and we all do the 'grass is greener' stuff
I can't possibly read all of this commentary. I just wanted to point out that most of the beef from public school teachers stems from being evaluated based on students' scores on standardized tests. If the general public only knew how crazy this test-centered education idea has gotten, you'd be standing alongside those teachers. The tests are ridden with errors, test only the things that are easily tested, test only in a manner that is easily graded, and often indicate little to nothing in terms of... learning. I don't think teachers are afraid of being evaluated, just not into being evaluated on things so lacking correlation to their work.
There are also many steps that Chicago has done to erode teacher morale, including decreasing benefits and upping classroom sizes. It can be humiliating to do a good job with the children only to get treated like a bar code on the size of a cereal box.
Vodoo: when you sign the old contract, you aren't by default signing the new contract that will be decided on. its not like they can just pull a bait and switch.
No time to read all this. But 1. I know you are performing under the old contract; my point is tbat it'a temporary because it is supposed to ve replaced, and you don't know by what, and you don't know what you are signing on for if the old contract is supposed to be gone.
You aren't signing on for anything because you literally haven't signed anything new. You continue to operate under the terms of the old contract. Any uncertainty relates only to terms of a *new* contract, to which the union must proactively agree.
Post by thejackpot on Sept 11, 2012 7:18:44 GMT -5
Teachers should be evaluated but not with such a heavy emphasis on student performance. My reasoning for this is that I am teaching them largely based on who they are when they enter my classroom. I can pour all of my energy into them and still they can't pass a test. Can they make strides with excellent teaching, of course; however, they can have excellent teaching and still fail to make acceptable growth. Based on environmental factors that I have no control over. I don't want that to be the main factor in IF I keep my job. I think a combination of numerous factors is a better indicator: actual teaching, classroom management, professional responsibilities and the lis goes on and on. Furthermore, if student performance becomes the biggest factor than what incentive do I have to stay in under-performing schools in impoverished locations. A job? While my colleagues a short distance away have kids who will never do poorly on standardized testing and have access to things like new textbooks. Nah, a kind heart can only go so far.
Post by cookiemdough on Sept 11, 2012 8:15:24 GMT -5
Are the results for evaluation based on comparisons between teachers in the same school, district-wide or state-wide? I guess I am wondering if for your individual merit increase if you worked in a school in a poverty stricken area, and you were ranked against other teachers within your school with the same kids, why is this so problematic?
And Chicago city teachers a,ready have it good co compared to most. I don't get it.
Are you fucking kidding me? No, really. Are you serious? As a Chicago resident and a parent of a child who was in a Chicago public school, I can safely say that NO, they do not have it better than most. Rahm Emmanuel is a piece of shit.
Also, FWIW, all of the parents that I know in Chicago are banding together to help each other out during this strike and support the teachers. Many parents are taking in other children during this time, I have a friend who owns a daycare/after school childcare business that is taking extra children, and there are free centers in my neighborhood that are taking in kids with no where to go during the day.
Oh, and no, I did not read all five pages. But this made me angry.
And Chicago city teachers a,ready have it good co compared to most. I don't get it.
Are you fucking kidding me? No, really. Are you serious? As a Chicago resident and a parent of a child who was in a Chicago public school, I can safely say that NO, they do not have it better than most. Rahm Emmanuel is a piece of shit.
Also, FWIW, all of the parents that I know in Chicago are banding together to help each other out during this strike and support the teachers. Many parents are taking in other children during this time, I have a friend who owns a daycare/after school childcare business that is taking extra children, and there are free centers in my neighborhood that are taking in kids with no where to go during the day.
Oh, and no, I did not read all five pages. But this made me angry.
Please to explain why they don't? From what I have read, they have a fair wage, average work hours, etc.
Are the results for evaluation based on comparisons between teachers in the same school, district-wide or state-wide? I guess I am wondering if for your individual merit increase if you worked in a school in a poverty stricken area, and you were ranked against other teachers within your school with the same kids, why is this so problematic?
Not in CPS, but from what I read, the evaluation system must be created by the individual districts. It has to have certain components, but the state is allowing districts and the unions to craft the evaluation system.
I am still reading up on this, but deep down I don't think teachers should be able to strike either. My main concern is for the kids and especially for the kids in the less safe areas of Chicago, where violence could spike because the kids are not in school and may not have somewhere safe to go.
CPD have said they are beefing up patrols and such to make sure there aren't any outbursts, but it is still worrisome.
We live down the street from an elementary school in Chicago and there were a bunch of picketers outside. It's sad. I feel like if you are a good teacher, then why should you be against evals/merit pay? That's how most jobs work - if you do well, you are paid/rewarded, and if you don't, then you don't get raises or are fired. I don't see why teachers should be treated any differently.
Because, the person evaluting you might not like you. Personal relationships or lack thereof can come into play when you have a highly subjective evaluation system. The eval. system we use is INSANE, it has 4 domains of teaching and within each domain there are about 5-6 areas to be POOR, BASIC, PROFICIENT or INNOVATIVE in. Some teachers that were once innovative within a domain have gone backwards because a new principal was evaluating them. How does one go from amazing to shitty, based on who is evaluating you, when you haven't changed the way you teach? And also how can I be innovative in 22+ areas? It's not humanly possible!!
I don't think there is a perfect evaluation system when your charge is to work with children and therefore teachers should not have merit pay. Children come to you with all sorts of truama and baggage. How is a hungry kid who has rotten teeth going to do well on a state standardized test? Him being hungry and having rotten teeth is not my fault!
Post by cookiemdough on Sept 11, 2012 23:27:30 GMT -5
Teaching is not the only profession in which you could have a boss that doesn't like you negatively effecting your eval.
And are you saying you must be "innovative" in every category in order to get an increase? Because of not, that again sounds like buckets used in other jobs with the thought being that you will always have some area that needs improvement and the eval should show where you excel and what you can work on to improve yourself as a professional.
I admit to only skimming much of this thread but has there been any discussion of what evaluation methods actually would be acceptable to teachers? I see a lot of "you can't evaluate on this basis, you can't evaluate on that basis" but I don't think I've seen any basis on which teachers believe they *should* be evaluated.
So what do teachers think is a fair method of evaluation?
I admit to only skimming much of this thread but has there been any discussion of what evaluation methods actually would be acceptable to teachers? I see a lot of "you can't evaluate on this basis, you can't evaluate on that basis" but I don't think I've seen any basis on which teachers believe they *should* be evaluated.
So what do teachers think is a fair method of evaluation?
I posted our whole evaluation process. I am fine with it. But, it involves no links to student achievement or student evals. It is entirely observational. (It's on page 4).
I should also point out that it does not affect our pay at all. You increase your pay through additional education (up to a limit) and in the first 12 years you go up a pay 'ladder'. Once we hit the top of the ladder we get COL increases if they are bargained for and 'won'.
What I think is dumb is when schools do not do SURPRISE evals. Most of the schools I've taught at have teachers schedule a time and class period to be observed in. How idiotic. So, you basically have to teacher 1 or 2 good lessons a year, lol.
There should be a combo of planned and surprise observations. I do think test scores should be used, but not as the main factor. You should be responsible for YOUR students improving, not taking a kid who can't read in 9th grade and having them read Shakespear.
Its all about the middle ground. One side thinks tests are the answer. The other thinks they are the devil. Really, IMO, they are in the middle.
What I think is dumb is when schools do not do SURPRISE evals. Most of the schools I've taught at have teachers schedule a time and class period to be observed in. How idiotic. So, you basically have to teacher 1 or 2 good lessons a year, lol.
My principal does surprise 'evals' all the time, it's called he walks into my classroom on a daily basis (twice yesterday, at least). If he saw something he wasn't happy with he would tell me. But to try to do a formal evaluation on the fly would be ridiculous, you would have no guarantee that you would choose a period that something worth seeing would be happening (when he walked in period 3 yesterday my kids were writing a reading assessment. I was working with two special needs kids but beyond that, not much to evaluate.
Yes, I could see how one would think that it seems 'put on' to schedule two observations but all the other things the principal 'sees' during the year, also count into the evaluation.
I don't believe tests should ever be the answer. Case and point: my husband's school has 92% of students in grade 6 achieving at proficiency or higher in reading. A school less than 10km had 42% students in grade 3 achieving at proficiency or higher in reading. Those scores are different due almost entirely due to demographics and not due to teaching ability of the teachers. I would never want the teachers at school B to be evaluated based on test results. Tests measure very little, they are used as a political tool to appease the public.
And with that I bid farewell, it's late and I need to leave for work soon.
I've taught in schools that do semi formal surprise observations and it has worked. If they walk in and its a test or assessment, they just come back another day. NBD.
I prefer it. It keeps me on my toes.
Plus I like that my principal knows that I'm a good and innovative teacher year round, not just twice a year. She still does planned evals so I can really show my good stuff, but I like the surprise evals, and I think they are necessary.
I admit to only skimming much of this thread but has there been any discussion of what evaluation methods actually would be acceptable to teachers? I see a lot of "you can't evaluate on this basis, you can't evaluate on that basis" but I don't think I've seen any basis on which teachers believe they *should* be evaluated.
So what do teachers think is a fair method of evaluation?
I posted our whole evaluation process. I am fine with it. But, it involves no links to student achievement or student evals. It is entirely observational. (It's on page 4).
I should also point out that it does not affect our pay at all. You increase your pay through additional education (up to a limit) and in the first 12 years you go up a pay 'ladder'. Once we hit the top of the ladder we get COL increases if they are bargained for and 'won'.
Sorry, I missed that. Thank you for sharing. A couple questions: first, if I'm reading this correctly, teachers are "officially" evaluated only once every five years. Is that correct? ETClarify: I see that issues may be corrected at any time during the five years, but administrators are only actually scheduled to observe once every five years, correct?
Second, there are a number of teacher complaints that personal animus on the part of their evaluators impacts the evaluation and is unfair; indeed, those complaints are in this very thread. I'm not quite sure I understand those complaints since they can be made about any evaluation system in any profession, but regardless, how does your system address or obviate that issue?
But to try to do a formal evaluation on the fly would be ridiculous, you would have no guarantee that you would choose a period that something worth seeing would be happening
Can't the administrator simply come back another time?
Sorry, I missed that. Thank you for sharing. A couple questions: first, if I'm reading this correctly, teachers are officially evaluated only once every five years. Is that correct?
Second, there are a number of teacher complaints that personal animus on the part of their evaluators impacts the evaluation and is unfair; indeed, those complaints are in this very thread. I'm not quite sure I understand those complaints since they can be made about any evaluation system in any profession, but regardless, how does your system address or obviate that issue?
Yep, experienced teachers once every five. New teachers are evaluated once in their first year and then again in their second year and then they begin their 5 year rotation. Teachers on Long Time Occasional contacts (happen a lot here since we have full year maternity leave!) are also evaluated.
I can easily say that if every teacher needed to be evaluated every year they would have to hire an extra part time admin for each school! It would be impossible. It is quite a process (a pre meeting, 2 observations, a post meeting) as well as a fairly detailed report.
Maybe it's because I am a competent teacher or maybe its because I am just lucky but I have never had a 'personality' clash with any of my admin. I have had issues that I disagree with them about but they all still respected my strengths as a teacher. I have however seen other relationships where I would question how comfortable I would be if I were that teacher. But that's why if you get an 'unsatisfactory' somebody else does your next evaluation. It allows for a different set of eyes.
Our process is very much about teacher improvement as opposed to anything else. Teachers look at the list of criteria and highlight the ones their lessons will 'highlight' and the ones they think are strength areas. The administrator uses the others, plus their observations, to identify areas of growth.
I truly believe that if you are competent teacher an administrator won't have grounds to fail you, and certainly 3 admin won't have grounds to fail you 3 times in a row, so you won't get terminated. I also truly believe that if you are incompetent teacher no amount of planning for two lessons will cover it up.
I am also aware that I may have a slightly 'rose coloured' interpretation of education for two reasons. #1 is that we have an awesome education system up here, I wouldn't ever want to work anywhere else. #2 is that I am currently 'opening' my second school. 8 years ago I opened a new school and this year I am opening another. This means that my entire staff was handpicked in each case (principal gets to build his staff from scratch). So perhaps I am just surrounded by awesome teachers?? (Although, if judged by our test scores alone, my last school would not be winning any awards, I work in a highly ESL area and yet people purposely moved into our neighbourhood so that their kids could go to this specific school - the largest elementary school in my school board at 1300 students).
In my 12 years teaching I have only met one truly incompetent teacher. He was 'let go' the by the end of the next year.
I admit to only skimming much of this thread but has there been any discussion of what evaluation methods actually would be acceptable to teachers? I see a lot of "you can't evaluate on this basis, you can't evaluate on that basis" but I don't think I've seen any basis on which teachers believe they *should* be evaluated.
So what do teachers think is a fair method of evaluation?
I posted our whole evaluation process. I am fine with it. But, it involves no links to student achievement or student evals. It is entirely observational. (It's on page 4).
I should also point out that it does not affect our pay at all. You increase your pay through additional education (up to a limit) and in the first 12 years you go up a pay 'ladder'. Once we hit the top of the ladder we get COL increases if they are bargained for and 'won'.
Similar here. Also, we get some credit for our involvement in the school community outside of the classroom. So if you have a club or a team or a dean or something, that counts positively toward your evaluation.
But to try to do a formal evaluation on the fly would be ridiculous, you would have no guarantee that you would choose a period that something worth seeing would be happening
Can't the administrator simply come back another time?
Administrators have SO much else to do, there is simply no way they could be contributing this much of their day. My school has about 28 teachers. One admin (there should be a second soon). There are too many things that a principal has to do in a day for him/her to constantly be dropping into a class for an extended amount of time.
Instead they are taught how to do 'walk bys'. They use a set of criteria and pick one or two for that day. Then they walk through a series of classrooms looking for those specific things to be happening (so it could be: guided reading, one on one work, use of success criteria, direct instruction, small group instruction, group work, etc...). These walk-bys give them a sense of the big picture as well as allow them to see what individual teachers may or may not be doing.
Okay, now I am really going...I have to pack my lunch and blow dry my bangs! I won't be able to check back until later tonight ladies, have fun debating!
I posted our whole evaluation process. I am fine with it. But, it involves no links to student achievement or student evals. It is entirely observational. (It's on page 4).
I should also point out that it does not affect our pay at all. You increase your pay through additional education (up to a limit) and in the first 12 years you go up a pay 'ladder'. Once we hit the top of the ladder we get COL increases if they are bargained for and 'won'.
Similar here. Also, we get some credit for our involvement in the school community outside of the classroom. So if you have a club or a team or a dean or something, that counts positively toward your evaluation.
Yep, here too, there are 5 areas and one of them is 'contributions to the school'. Anything you do that contributes to the school environment/culture counts!
Wow, We are evaluated every year. Every 5 is insane.
We have a more indepth process every 3 years. But we are evaluated every 5. And we have to do either a club or a sport. I do both. I don't get "extra credit" for it. I get paid to be a coach though.
And we have 30 teachers and two admins. They still are able to do formal evals every single year. Its not that hard. They block off a two week period of time for planned observations where that's all they do. And the surprise ones are just peppered through the year. If they walk in my room and I'm testing (although we have a test calendar online so they know that ahead of time, they can just walk next door and check someone else out instead.