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.
Thank goodness for lines at Starbucks! We don't have to do any extra-curriculars; they are all optional. But most teachers do at least one. I don't get paid to coach but we don't take our sports nearly as seriously as the US! Our teachers are exceptionally well paid though.
Yeah I don't get paid much, but its a serious time commitment, even at the middle school level. Practice everyday from 3-5, plus about 3 games a week once the season starts. Half of the games involve travel, often 45+ minutes each way. Then we end the seasons with a weekend long tournament (4 games a day). I love it, but I don't think I could do it for free.
Yeah I don't get paid much, but its a serious time commitment, even at the middle school level. Practice everyday from 3-5, plus about 3 games a week once the season starts. Half of the games involve travel, often 45+ minutes each way. Then we end the seasons with a weekend long tournament (4 games a day). I love it, but I don't think I could do it for free.
Yeah, so I coached middle school boys v-ball last year (6-8) and it involved practice before or after school for an hour before the season (so about 4 weeks) then it involved practice two-three times a week plus games two to three times a week during the season. Travel times weren't brutal, only one school was 35 minutes away. Then we had playoffs. We also had 6 weekend tournaments, including provincial cup, which was two days straight and an overnight trip (hotel and transportation paid). Last year I only did 6-8, the year before I did 6-8 and then 6 alone. It was brutal, it meant that kind of commitment from September til March!
This year I teach 5, not 8 so I am going to coach grade 6 and then maybe 4/5. But the schedule for those grades is way better because it involves maybe 5 after school tournaments plus practices and the season only runs about two months.
My co-coach and I used to laugh because it always took the whole season for the kids to realize that we weren't paid to spend our weekends at tournaments. They were always in awe!
I could never coach in the US because my coaching skills aren't nearly good enough, here the bar isn't set nearly as high and especially not in middle school! I coach because it helps me get to know the kids better and because I feel like I need to share in the coaching that needs to get done, not because I feel a passion for it or because I am very good at it!
I hear you. I love it too and I love the relationships I get to form with the kids.
I just couldn't afford the increased child care costs without the tiny stipend, lol. I'm away from DD so much, and our childcare doesn't go until 5:30. (nevermind 7,8, or even 9 on game days!)
I'm not sure I understand re: evaluated every 5 years. I have 3-4 observations per year, and at the end of the year we have a final evaluation. That evaluation lets us know whether or not we are recommended for continued employment, continued employment with an action plan, or if we don't have a job.
Teachers can be put on an action plan at any point in the school year, but it does take more of a process to actually get fired.
I know, right? I don't understand being evaluated every 5 years, especially in the US where it often takes 2+ years after a bad eval to actually fire a teacher. It could take 7 years to fire a bad teacher!
Post by thejackpot on Sept 12, 2012 7:11:30 GMT -5
We are observed formally every other year. We have surprise visits at any time and the expectation is that every single day you are doing a lesson that is observation ready. My objectives are posted on the board and we are working towards a series of semester goals. To be honest, I can't tell you the last time I have been observed. I guess they think I know what I am doing I would LOVE an evaluation that is a true assessment of what I am doing as a teacher and I have only had 2 of those in my entire career. Once was when I was a newbie and a retired training teacher observed me ( I sought him out) and the other time was when the head of the county in my subject area came to observe me. NEither of those were glowing you exceed expectations observations. Instead they were while you exceed expectations these are areas where there is room for growth. One told me to wait a bit longer for the students to process and response, that was super valuable to me. I need that stuff. I don't need the only either satisfactory or unsatisfactory checked boxes and the complaint that there is paper in the ledge.
I'm with barefoot, my DH has always been evaluated on a yearly basis with multiple observations per year. His old district is now test piloting an evaluation system that includes student evaluations. He's now at a private school so we don't really deal with these things anymore.
I just want to add that the way some people talk about teachers is really frustrating. In fact we chose a pay cut to move go private school for better working conditions and really an environment in which DH isn't expected to do more and more for less and less pay simply because the kids needs are placed above anyone else's. He was also a varsity coach with very little help so believe hem he gave a lot to his kids. I think teachers would be much more open to discussing evaluation systems if we (I'm a professor as well) didn't feel so judged by these conversations. All organizations have some lousy employees and it is impossible to get rid of everyone, we just aren't that great at selection and evaluation. But with teachers it feels like a witch hunt because we 'know there are soooo many terrible teachers.' Let me be clear, I know there are bad teachers and I don't want them teaching our children. I just think in order to have an effective conversation we need to not demonize the profession. After all it's normal human behavior to get defensive if you feel personally attacked.
Post by cookiemdough on Sept 12, 2012 7:43:45 GMT -5
Am I missing something? Shouldn't the needs of kids come first when discussing education?
I am not hating on the profession I am just frustrated and trying to understand what an acceptable alternative is that the teachers / unions can agree on.
Am I missing something? Shouldn't the needs of kids come first when discussing education?
I think this is why it's such a heated issue. Unlike, say, a plumber, where you can simply switch to someone else if you don't like the performance results, students are essentially a captive audience, save for those who can afford to attend private school, and nothing gets the gander up quite like something that impacts one's child.
A teachers' union is there to support the teachers, not the students. This sounds ugly on its face, but it makes sense, all things considered. The problem is that what benefits the teachers may not benefit the students because the goals can be in competition (e.g., saving the job of a teacher who is merely mediocre). Add in the fact that the parents of the underserved students pay the taxes that help to support those mediocre (or worse) teachers, and it's a complicated brew.
I absolutely agree that demonizing serves only to inflame passions all around. However, teachers need to recognize that their role in society is unique, and if they want a monopoly in their neck of the woods via a union, they should be subject to unique job parameters. I don't think a simple overhaul is going to work, and a lot must change on both sides of the debate, not least a renewed appreciation for the absolute significance of educating the next generation and an end to the denigration of teachers and education in general.
Of course the kids are important and without them the profession would not exist. In any profession you will lose a lot of good employees if you always tell them that their customers, suppliers, etc have to come before their own personal needs. Hey we need you to work more hours because our customers need it but we aren't going to pay you any more. I know that might mean you are spending more on childcare but really you should be thankful you have a job. That kind of attitude towards your workforce is counterproductive and theres plenty of academic research to back that up. My husband put in ridiculously crazy hrs as a public HS teacher, significantly more than me as a tenure track prof and for way less pay (he also has a doctorate). Despite that, people at his school were constantly trying to guilt him into doing more, because you know the kids need you. We should be able to strike some kind of balance.
We have 2-3 formal observations a year. Our principals also visit us every couple of days to just do a walk through etc. Our evaluation system is a bear for principals to get through, it's a ton of paper work for both them and us.
Anyone use or familiar with the Charlotte Danielson framework? That is what we use.
So while Chicago teachers START at a higher salary than some local districts, they fall behind. ANECDOTE ALERT: when my husband left a fancy North Shore district to teach in the CTU, he took a $10k pay cut. Now, with 9 years in the system, he brings home about $40k. Yeah, we're living the high life on the West Side. A number of my neighbors who are 2-teacher couples actually bought their homes through an affordable housing program. We do, after all, have a residency requirement. Note that posted salaries include the 7% that the Board is supposed to be setting aside for pensions--which they haven't been doing, taking instead "pension holidays" to cash flow their budget.
And don't confuse the students' instructional day with the length of time teachers are required to be in the building--DH clocks in (yep--he punches a time clock. Which doesn't work half the time, so he's always fighting to get the right pay check) by 7:45 every morning and out at 4. He teaches 4 classes (not sections, different classes) and has 2 preps. For English and AP Psych. Year after year he is able to take kids on the bubble and get them to college-ready ACT levels. But he has to administer the test to everyone--even that kid with the 60 IQ I mentioned earlier. Illinois is one of the only states that gives the ACT to all Juniors.
I beleive there is also some hitch that permits the BOE to determine evaluations without CTU input, but I can't find the link. REACH tests only reading and math--so how does that fairly judge the effectiveness of science, social studies, or art teachers?
If you look at a list of the top city schools (and many of the top state schools) they are union CPS schools. Often magnet or selective enrollment, but they are taucht by the same CTU teachers who instruct classes in North Lawndale, Gresham, the Little Villiage and Englewood. The difference is the students.
Charter schools as a whole are performing no better--and frequently worse--then neighborhood schools, even though they, too have the ability to select students and "counsel out" those who don't fit in. The graduation rate of the highly touted Urban Prep was right around 50%, and their average ACT score didn't hit 15. I am late for a meeting so can't search for a link, but the information is available.
On time in the classroom - I was really kinda shocked at that. CPS had 5 hour and 45 minute school days? Where 'dey do that at?! Our school days are 7 hours. T goes to school at 8am and gets out at 3pm. It's been the same length since I was a kid. My school day was from 8:15pm to 3:15pm.
On time in the classroom - I was really kinda shocked at that. CPS had 5 hour and 45 minute school days? Where 'dey do that at?! Our school days are 7 hours. T goes to school at 8am and gets out at 3pm. It's been the same length since I was a kid. My school day was from 8:15pm to 3:15pm.
I'm assuming that they're subtracting recess and lunch from that seven hours. So if they get two 15 minute breaks and 45 minutes at lunch, for example, that gets them down to 5:45.
I'm assuming that they're subtracting recess and lunch from that seven hours. So if they get two 15 minute breaks and 45 minutes at lunch, for example, that gets them down to 5:45.
I'm assuming that they're subtracting recess and lunch from that seven hours. So if they get two 15 minute breaks and 45 minutes at lunch, for example, that gets them down to 5:45.
That was a really interesting link, especially the stuff about the length of lunch (an HOUR? OMG - I just helped out at B's school the other day for lunch, and the word was that they "try" to keep them there for fifteen minutes, but it's often shorter)
... and about KIPP (which was featured prominently in Waiting for Superman) and seems like an interesting - - but fundamentally limited - model.
I'm trying to avoid this whole fight, because I honestly don't know what the answer is. The reality is that evaluating teachers based on kids' performance (particularly performance on standardized tests) is, IMHO, a really bad idea on some level, but I honestly don't know what the answer is.
A teachers' job is to impart the material to their kids.
I totally get that in different schools there will be very different socioeconomic factors going in: the kids' level to begin with, how much support they're getting at home, etc.
I also believe that if a teacher presents material to their students, and some huge percentage of them fail the teacher's test, then there's clearly been a failure - - and it's not by the kids. That's absolutely not the same as grading teachers based on kids' performance on standardized tests... but it's also not particularly effective, because all it does is encourage teachers to be "easier."
Like I said, I wish I had the answer. I'm feeling tremendously lucky right now, because the teachers' at B's new (public, magnet) school are some of the best and the brightest the area has to offer, and they're excited and charged up for a new project... but I want them to stay that way, not beaten down by a bureaucracy.
Part of the frustration, as I see it, is that there are long-held resentments on both sides of the issue. Like, teachers are all PO'ed that they've been mistreated in the past. And administrators/government officials are all PO'ed that it's so hard to do anything because of the strength of the teachers' unions... because teachers have banded together because they've been mistreated in the past. It's a vicious circle. Nobody trusts anybody. And the downward spiral continues.
Teaching, no matter what type of kids you work with, is about teaching the whole child. Always. I agree BB.
I don't think anyone thinks that we should just use testing to measure teachers. Many just think it should be a part of it.
On a side note, I was observed by our head master today. Observation number 1 for the year He walked in during a quiz, asked me how long I thought the quiz would take, and came back when it was over to watch my mini lesson. Easy. Our Head master runs the entire school, which has close to 1000 kids. If he can be flexible as the head hauncho, I think most lower level admins at other schools can too.
It is unfortunate that the ACT and other standardized tests that are similar to it are being used in the way they are. Those tests are not designed to demonstrate teacher effectiveness, nor are they designed to measure fact regurgitation or anything that can be taught in a single year. Rather, they are designed to assess critical thinking, reading comprehension, mastery of language, and readiness for the rigors of college or readiness to be successful in a job after earning your degree. These are things that should be learned throughout your educational career and should be addressed well before your junior year of high school if they are deficient. To expect a single teacher to have any control over how a student is doing in the areas measured by a test like the ACT is ridiculous actually. That's just not what that kind of test measures.
To test a student with an IQ of 60 is silly, because the ACT is obviously at a higher reading level than that child can achieve and he/she is obviously going to do poorly. But that in and of itself is ok, because the ACT and tests like it are just designed to measure where the student is at in comparison to a normative sample of other students. It is useful to know that your child is in the 5th percentile, even if that isn't "news" it is information you can use to determine what to do about it. If you don't know how your student is doing academically, you can't intervene with the student to make things better. Or, if a student has such a low IQ that there is nothing that can be done to make them academically stronger, you can use that information to figure out an alternative plan.
The problem isn't the test, but what is being done with the results. Assessments are very useful tools for collecting information, but no one should be punished for what that information says. I suppose you could argue someone should be punished for not trying to act on the information - if a teacher knows a child is struggling (as evidenced by an assessment) and doesn't do anything to help them, that's a whole separate issue IMO. But of course a teacher shouldn't be expected to "save" the kid either. I would argue that it is a teacher's responsibility to help the kid and his/her family to become aware of the problem, point them to some resources to help them address the problem, and follow up with assistance as needed - but a teacher can't solve every problem and that's partly up to the parents, community, and the student to take responsibility too.