Education reform proposals often treat schools like factories
Posted: Thursday, March 15, 2007
The latest but by no means the only idea to reforming education by reforming teachers was presented this week by former UNI President Robert Koob (who began his career teaching in Moville, Iowa) and Chamber of Commerce President Debi Durham. The idea was to create a “career ladder” for teachers to reward “good” teachers, much the same way a “good” lawyer is promoted to associate. This will keep “good” teachers and discourage “bad” ones by removing their cost of living raises and eroding their earning power.
I’d be happy to support the idea on two conditions:
One, prove to me that in every profession, in every company throughout the United States (I was going to say “throughout the world,” but there’s no use being difficult) that every promotion above the rank-and-file has been solely on technical merit and not because the person married the boss’ offspring, joined the right country club, supported the CEO’s favorite causes or generally put in more time trying to get a promotion and fighting turf battles than they did doing their job. If you can’t, then the “career ladder” reward system won’t improve education.
Two, prove to me that in the classroom the teacher is the sole difference between a class doing well and a class doing poorly. Prove to me that factors such as whether the parents make a student do homework, whether the parents are even home, whether the kid has eaten since the last school lunch, whether the kid gets beaten up by gang members on the way to school, whether the classroom has adequate supplies or whether the kids even speak enough English to understand what the teacher is saying have absolutely no bearing on their performance.
That’s the key to all these merit-based hoops certain groups want to make teachers jump through. It’s not how you reward the good teachers and get rid of the bad ones, it’s how you tell the difference.
One of the worst teachers I ever had, a guy whose lack of ability in the classroom still irritates me, made it up the career ladder as it existed then. He became a principal. His abilities in the classroom didn’t matter because he was the football coach.
One of the best teachers I ever had quit after two years because she was harassed by students and not supported by the administration.
If you ask someone else in my class, they might switch those two evaluations. It doesn’t make much difference until you start tying pay to the classification.
You can base the teacher’s evaluation on test scores, but I got A’s from both of the above teachers. My favorite teacher even gave me a D. Her A meant I learned something. His A meant he didn’t bother making tests difficult.
A lot of the education proposals embrace the idea that schools are a factory. Raw material is trucked in one door and after a lot of banging and sweating it goes out the other door as a car or toilet. The more cars and toilets come out, the better the bangers and sweaters are. You’ve got a bottom line, you’ve got a number you can compare to last year’s number.
In this view, students come in as empty pots. The teacher shovels facts into them while minimizing the leakage until test time. The main goal of education is to produce a number that’s bigger or larger than some other time or some other teacher. To the people making these proposals, things without a bottom line don’t have any value.
Education can’t be recorded with a number. If you emphasize test scores, for example, as a way of rewarding teachers they will teach the test and nothing else. If test scores at schools where there’s poverty and more ESL demand like Irving or McKinley are lower than schools in suburban wealthier areas like Nodland, and you say it's because Irving and McKinley teachers aren’t as good, you’re doing a great disservice to the Irving and McKinley teachers.
There’s a lot right with our educational system. Test scores may be dropping in Iowa but they’re still among the best in the nation. We’re still producing teachers, for example, that other states are willing to pay big money to attract. I’ve never heard a teacher take all the credit if a student succeeds. Under the merit proposals, they would take all the blame if a student fails.
Journal copy editor Dave Yoder can be reached at 293-4246 or at daveyoder@siouxcityjournal.com. Past columns are available at www.siouxcityjournal.com.
I’d be happy to support the idea on two conditions:
One, prove to me that in every profession, in every company throughout the United States (I was going to say “throughout the world,” but there’s no use being difficult) that every promotion above the rank-and-file has been solely on technical merit and not because the person married the boss’ offspring, joined the right country club, supported the CEO’s favorite causes or generally put in more time trying to get a promotion and fighting turf battles than they did doing their job. If you can’t, then the “career ladder” reward system won’t improve education.
Two, prove to me that in the classroom the teacher is the sole difference between a class doing well and a class doing poorly. Prove to me that factors such as whether the parents make a student do homework, whether the parents are even home, whether the kid has eaten since the last school lunch, whether the kid gets beaten up by gang members on the way to school, whether the classroom has adequate supplies or whether the kids even speak enough English to understand what the teacher is saying have absolutely no bearing on their performance.
That’s the key to all these merit-based hoops certain groups want to make teachers jump through. It’s not how you reward the good teachers and get rid of the bad ones, it’s how you tell the difference.
One of the worst teachers I ever had, a guy whose lack of ability in the classroom still irritates me, made it up the career ladder as it existed then. He became a principal. His abilities in the classroom didn’t matter because he was the football coach.
One of the best teachers I ever had quit after two years because she was harassed by students and not supported by the administration.
If you ask someone else in my class, they might switch those two evaluations. It doesn’t make much difference until you start tying pay to the classification.
You can base the teacher’s evaluation on test scores, but I got A’s from both of the above teachers. My favorite teacher even gave me a D. Her A meant I learned something. His A meant he didn’t bother making tests difficult.
A lot of the education proposals embrace the idea that schools are a factory. Raw material is trucked in one door and after a lot of banging and sweating it goes out the other door as a car or toilet. The more cars and toilets come out, the better the bangers and sweaters are. You’ve got a bottom line, you’ve got a number you can compare to last year’s number.
In this view, students come in as empty pots. The teacher shovels facts into them while minimizing the leakage until test time. The main goal of education is to produce a number that’s bigger or larger than some other time or some other teacher. To the people making these proposals, things without a bottom line don’t have any value.
Education can’t be recorded with a number. If you emphasize test scores, for example, as a way of rewarding teachers they will teach the test and nothing else. If test scores at schools where there’s poverty and more ESL demand like Irving or McKinley are lower than schools in suburban wealthier areas like Nodland, and you say it's because Irving and McKinley teachers aren’t as good, you’re doing a great disservice to the Irving and McKinley teachers.
There’s a lot right with our educational system. Test scores may be dropping in Iowa but they’re still among the best in the nation. We’re still producing teachers, for example, that other states are willing to pay big money to attract. I’ve never heard a teacher take all the credit if a student succeeds. Under the merit proposals, they would take all the blame if a student fails.
Journal copy editor Dave Yoder can be reached at 293-4246 or at daveyoder@siouxcityjournal.com. Past columns are available at www.siouxcityjournal.com.
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 2 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
Moderate Observer wrote on Apr 11, 2007 10:00 AM:
Joan wrote on Mar 15, 2007 9:05 AM: