Shame On You, School Board

ASSESSING TEACHERS

“Keeping teachers simply by seniority. Who are paid double, many who are past passion for the job, who are out of date in their ideas and training, who did not return this year to make room for new teachers because you did not offer them enough incentive (more $) is wrong.”
(“Retidder”)

There’s just no question about it: “Retidder” is categorical. The old teachers (the “lame ducks”) have no passion for the job, their ideas and training are out of date and, what’s more, they are greedy – they did not retire because they were not offered enough money. By contrast, the up and coming “stars” have passion for the job, their ideas and training are cutting edge and, of course, they are not greedy.

The obvious retort to all this is: “Really?” Does Retidder have a shred of evidence to support his claims? Since he gives none, his pronouncements must all be the direct, unerring, and intuitive deliverances from some higher but unannounced realm. But it’s not just Retidder’s arrogant and unfounded pronouncements which are off-putting. He offers nothing by way of any alternative. How, in other words, would Retidder go about assessing the teachers?

It can’t be just on the basis of their being “new” since – I’m sure even Retidder would acknowledge this – new teachers can be just as incompetent as the greedy the veterans. So, Retidder must have other criteria he will soon bring forward. What will they be?

What about a “passion test,” Retidder? How would you measure the relative intensity of the passion of both the greedy veterans and the new “stars?” What yardstick would you employ? Of course, Retidder doesn’t know. He hasn’t any idea, up-to-date or otherwise.

How about Retidder’s “up-to-date ideas?” themselves? What, exactly, are these ideas Retidder? Do you have the faintest idea, up-to-date or otherwise? No, I didn’t think so. In the same way, what about that “up-to-date training,” Retidder? What, exactly are these new teaching “skills” of which you speak? Of course, Retidder has no idea about these marvellous up-to-date skills either.

More than that Retidder, it sounds like your philosophy of education is a bit askew. You seems to think that think teaching is just a matter of technique, of the mechanical application of some sort of up-to-date skills. But here’s an “up-to-date idea” for you Retidder: People who think your way are called “technicists.” They want to reduce teaching which – by the way, Retidder, is an art and not a “technique” – to the principles of some misconceived notion of the assembly line, of profitable business management. These people, Retidder, are the real enemies of education properly understood, that is, the cultivation of a reflective mind. It seems to me, Retidder, that you are in the enemy camp.

So Retidder, what’s left? Don’t ask the principals who are technicists/managerialists anyway. They see education in qualtative terms like you do, Retidder. Don’t ask the parents, particularly those whose kids bad-mouth their teachers for their poor performance. In any case, Retidder, in spite of whjat many think, parents are not teachers. So who else are we going to ask, Retidder? You?

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

ASSESSING TEACHERS: (RSVPs)

: Koda (2:36PM) – “Can I ask the point of Teacher’s Assistants?” You gave the answer yourself: “extra help and attention” is code for “Special Needs Students” which itself is often code for out-of-control students.

: Life Sucks (2:44PM) – no one really cares about shit, anymore. but that’s the way it goes in today’s world.” The same reply as I gave to Retidder: Really?

: Tommyjules (3:40PM) – “Parents are supposed to teach you most of the basic things you need to function in real life.” You must distinguish between school and home Tommy. Parents are not subject specialists and formal educators. There is an enormous difference, even if you don’t think so. (Your reference to “real life” resonates wih Suck’s “today’s world.” I guess that’s why you agree with him, Tommy.)

– “Stop blaming the students and take responsibility for for the future of our country.”
Read the title of my post again, Tommy. No one is blaming the students. They weren’t a part of my post.

: lolcats (4:09PM) – Did I say that we should “keep things going as they are?” Try reading the post again, lolcats. Did it sound that way to you?

– “All I read was a bitch with no solutions and a bitch about the other bitch having no solutions.”
Read the post again. There was no direct attempt to formulate a way to “distinguish between the valuable and the useless” but there certainly WAS an indirect attempt. Infer it from my criticism of Retidder, lolcats. Start with my assertion to the effect that teaching is “an art.”

– Is it a fact that it is “the result of an inefficient school board and a strong union?” No.

– “Do I have the solution? I would have to spend some time to think about that.” You do that lolcats, you do that. Report back when you have your solution.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

ASSESSING TEACHERS (RSVPs II)

A brief review:

lolcat (4:09PM) commented, “All I read was a bitch with no solutions and a bitch about the other’s bitch having no solutions.”

Here are some “solutions,” lolcat. After a Bachelor’s Degree in the appropriate discipline – not all disciplines are “appropriate” – a formal examination session in the following areas:

Session I: An extended (2-3 hour) written examination asking the following questions:

1. What do you understand by the word
“education?”
2. What do you understand by the word “teaching?”
3. What do you understand by the word “learning?”
4. Why do you love your subject?
5. What is your philosophy of education?

Session II: An oral interview to discuss the answers given in Session I. In addition to formal academic answers, the personality of the teacher will also be assessed. Does he have a passion for teaching? His subject? His students? What are his ideals?

Session III: A two-year probationary period to obtain a temporary permit. (Regular observation by veteran teachers.) Periodic observation to follow for five years to obtain a permanent teaching certificate (also to be reviewed periodically).

: Tommyjules (5:53PM) – “I’m sure we can all agree. I think you can tell if a teacher is reaching (read teaching) her students effectively after spending a few moments in the classroom, certainly after a full day.”

Sorry, Tommy, we can’t all agree. There are too many variables which we won’t go into here. Well, Tommy, maybe YOU can make the determination but for the rest of us, not so much. (I think the school boards could use someone like you, Tommy. Why not give them a ring?)

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

ASSESSING TEACHERS (RSVPs IV)

: Pretty Kitty (10:51AM) – disagrees with my claim that her assertion to the effect that the higher up one goes in the seniority chain as a result of the teachers’ union contract the greater the incidence of apathy in its members, is incoherent.

Try this:

1. A greater incidence of heart attacks among older teachers has been noted.
2. These teachers are union members.
3. Therefore, the union is the cause of a greater incidence of heart attacks among older teachers.

But chain of reasoning is incoherent. There is no causal connection between union membership and the increased incidence of heart attacks. In the same way, there is no causal connection between union membership and apathy among older teachers.

: WTF (11:53AM) writes “The same people making these arguments are the same ones that belong to a UNION.”

But WTF is simply wrong. The people making the arguments (i.e. Retidder) do not belong to a teachers’ union until they have signed a contract with a school board and are working classroom teachers.

(One wonders why WTF has capitalized the word “UNION.” Is he a union-hater? If so, why? Does WTF have reasons for his position?)

Next.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

ASSESSING TEACHERS: (RSVPs V)

There are several forms of incoherence, from faulty logical reasoning (see my previous post) to that which possesses no reasoning at all. “joeblow’s” (May 7, 4:20PM) post is of the second sort. Ther absence of any sort of rational thought makes it necessary to look at his post piecemeal.

: In reference to the laid off teachers, he writes: “They were not FORCED to plead for their jobs at the school board meeting.” Who said that they were joe? What are you talking about?

: In reference to the laid-off teachers pleading for their jobs, joe writes: “This is an ancient right in the Education Act and the NSTU convinced the 44 teachers to exercise that right and waste too many hours at a board meeting.” What is this “ancient right” you are talking about, joe? To what article of the Education Act do you refer? Give the number. While the NSTU might have recommended that the teachers plead for their jobs, it never needed to “convince” them. Do you have any evidence to support this claim, joe? Further, why would the NSTU need to “convince” the teachers to plead their case? So as “not” – I assume joe means “not” – “to waste too many hours at a board meeting?” Would that be the reason, joe? Does that make any sense to you at all?
It doesn’t make any sense to me either, joe.

: “Other school board employees have no such right and this section of the legislation should be abolished.” There’s a very simple reason they don’t have that right joe. They don’t belong to the teachers’ union. You’ve got to try and understand that, joe. Other school board employees and teachers are – are you sitting down, joe? -are NOT THE SAME THING.

: The NSTU “never complains or offers sympathy when non-teaching staff are laid off.” I don’t know about the “sympathy” part joe (and neither do you) but the reason they don’t complain is the same as the one given above: non-teaching staff are not part of the teachers’ union. Struggle to understand that one, joe.

: Other non-teaching staff “were laid off almost every year to save the jobs of over-paid and over-pensioned members of the NSTU.” That’s called “faulty-logic incoherence,” joe. Those non-teachig staff were not laid off to save the jobs of the members of the NSTU. There’s no connection, joe. The non-teaching staff were laid off because there was – wait for this joe – a surplus of non-teaching staff. The budgets of the non-teaching staff and the teachers – wait for this one too, joe – are separate. And why are the teachers “over-paid and over-pensioned,” joe. On what basis do you make that assertion joe? Come on, joe, tell us what the teachers SHOULD be getting for their pay and their pensions. And don’t forget to support your assertions, joe.

I think I can guess why joe is upset about the teachers’ pay and pensions. He was a member of the non-teaching staff and was laid off. Am I right about this, joe?

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

ASSESSING TEACHERS: (RSVP VIII)

Oh dear, there’s more but without any increment in knowledge. Let’s start with “Pretty Kitty.”

She writes to Rt, “just ignore ‘im, dude. I generally do.” Well, Pretty Kitty, you don’t. Scroll back. I previously explained how you went down the the “logical reasoning hole” – the heart attacks and the old union teachers and all that – but I guess it never registered. Shame on you, Pretty Kitty.

: hurrah (5:22PM) – Your post was incomprehensible. Start composing again.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

ASSESSING TEACHERS (RSVPs X)

A correction: My last post should have been numbered IX instead of VII. Make the correction with indelible ink on your computer screens now.

:Pretty Kitty (10:06AM) – I was sadened to learn about your “academia burn out.” You are missing a lot of fun not spanking the cognitively-challenged Redneck Strutters. Maybe Tommy can
re-ignite the spark. Put a couple moves on him at the next summit.

:Orgasmatron (10:43AM) – You should have gone with the “big long anecdote” about a teacher you once had.

: joeblow (12:37PM) – Retidder’s bitch was all about age and the contrast betweem the young stars and the old duds.

– Any teacher can appeal what he deems to be an “unfair dismissal” by means of a presentation before the Board. That was never the question. It is not the same thing, however, as “begging for their jobs.”

– You might have noted that my “scribblings” were about TEACHER ASSESSMENT and not budget cuts which you seem to suppose was my focus. joeblow, you’ve got try try and focus your mind. Read my previous sentence to yourself, take note of the capital letters, and try not to move your lips.

:Mathew Luthor (1:39PM) – Violins don’t have buttons.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!