I have to admit that I watch Fox News on a regular basis. I do it for a number of reasons. First, when I'm on the treadmill it helps me to walk faster because it gets my blood boiling. Next, I watch it for a good laugh because, after all, it is pretty funny every time they say,"Fair and Balanced". Fox News is a 24/7 Republican commercial run by the former head of the Republican National Committee, Roger Ailes. It is pure propaganda TV and sadly, our troops shed blood fighting against governments that used propaganda techniques on the masses. Lastly, I watch Fox so that I can know what my Fox watching friends are going to say before they say it. They parrot what they hear on Fox like talking points and then you hear them around the restaurant table. It's good to be prepared.
Lately, I've been hearing a great deal about the 50% of the people who pay no taxes. When you hear that, they normally assume that these people are the freeloaders, minorities and immigrants, who game the system while the rest of us pay for it. It sounds like class warfare but that happens only when you want to raise taxes on the rich! These are the people who pick up their welfare checks in limos. Basically, they want these people to pay their fair share but not the wealthy because they are the job creators. How is that working out for us so far? They are still taking the tax cuts but I don't see the jobs!
Here is where a clarification is needed. First of all they rounded up. It is more like 47% who don't pay federal taxes. Half of those people have incomes that are too low to pay taxes. They may be hiding it just as some wealthy people do along with corporate loopholes. Let's face it, every class of people game the system if they can. About 22% are seniors citizens on Social Security and about 15% are the working poor who qualify for earned income and child care credit. The remainder of the 47% includes corporations who pay no federal income tax, such as GE, Citigroup, BOA, Boeing, Exxon Mobil, Valero and Chevron. Not only do they pay no taxes but we subsidize many of these companies and have bailed them out with our tax dollars when they mess up!
You never hear about that on Fox. They want their viewers to get angry at the little guy who is not paying their fair share, not the wealthy. It is much easier to turn people against the minorities and the immigrants rather than their constituents. Feed the hate that is already out there! They are the easy targets. Fox is like the bully on the playground picking on the weakest kid. The profits being made by the oil companies, insurance companies, financial institutions, along with the salaries and bonuses their CEO's make, are obscene but you will never hear about that on Fox News.
So for my friends who watch Fox, remember to take what they say with a grain of salt. You don't always get the complete picture because they have a conservative agenda that is obvious. Mainstream media may have a left wing bias but Fox is in your face! There is really no comparison. And if their bias was equal, a conservative bias is no better than a liberal bias. If you are against slanted news, they should be just as angry about the conservative slant, but they are not. So please don't be so hypocritical. Wake up, America!
Sunday, November 27, 2011
What a Difference a Year Makes
Recently, I was informed of an overnight success. A science teacher was teaching his subject in the South Bronx with minimal success. Only 55% of his students were passing the state regents in that particular subject area. He was discouraged and disappointed in the results. The next year he was transferred to a better district in Queens. He used the same lesson plans from the previous year and really didn't change his teaching style one bit. Miraculously, his success rate increased to a 90% passing rate. According to the data, he became a super teacher overnight! He went from receiving an incompetent evaluation to master teacher in just one year!
This particular story, which happens to be true, crystallizes the ludicrous notion that teachers should be evaluated according to test scores. Teachers have always been evaluated by administrators. Principals can come into your classroom at any time to observe your teaching style. In the past, before a teacher received tenure, the principal customarily made three formal observations. Over the years, that has increased to at least six observations by several administrators including the superintendent. This apparently didn't satisfy the politicians who wanted hard cold numbers to substantiate good teaching and the witch hunt began!
Feeding into the public's thirst to get those overpaid, fat, lazy, public servants out of the profession, our good Governor Cuomo wanted teacher evaluations to include how many students passed the NYS tests. That number should count for 40% of a teacher's evaluation, but the courts knocked it down to the original agreement of 20%. In reality, test scores measure the ability and effort of students, and the only thing they can evaluate is the program of study being offered by the district not the teacher.
Administrator know who their good teachers are. These are the educators that offer parents and students a learning environment that they are satisfied with. When administrators get an overabundance of complaints concerning a particular teacher, perhaps what should be considered is a peer review. Using retired master teachers to evaluate a troubled classroom would add a different perspective to the evaluation process. A master teacher could intercede and first do an analysis of the general make up of the class. If there is a large percentage of special needs children along with discipline problems and ELL students, that has to be taken into consideration. Those are the factors that put a drag on the class and can affect learning. The composition of a class can have a detrimental effect on those students who want to learn. And yes, the teacher can be at fault in which case the master teacher would act as a coach or mentor until the classroom environment improves.
A peer review system is much more comprehensive than looking at percentages and would constitute a much more equitable approach to teacher evaluations. Simply looking at a number tells you nothing about the ability of the teacher, however, it speaks volumes about the ignorance of our politicians. Teachers, more than anyone, want to weed out incompetence. We truly care about our students, and want them to become productive citizens. The future of our country depends on it. It is the reason why we became teachers in the first place. We, above all others, would never protect incompetence and we above all others, have the ability to recognize it. Wake up, America!
This particular story, which happens to be true, crystallizes the ludicrous notion that teachers should be evaluated according to test scores. Teachers have always been evaluated by administrators. Principals can come into your classroom at any time to observe your teaching style. In the past, before a teacher received tenure, the principal customarily made three formal observations. Over the years, that has increased to at least six observations by several administrators including the superintendent. This apparently didn't satisfy the politicians who wanted hard cold numbers to substantiate good teaching and the witch hunt began!
Feeding into the public's thirst to get those overpaid, fat, lazy, public servants out of the profession, our good Governor Cuomo wanted teacher evaluations to include how many students passed the NYS tests. That number should count for 40% of a teacher's evaluation, but the courts knocked it down to the original agreement of 20%. In reality, test scores measure the ability and effort of students, and the only thing they can evaluate is the program of study being offered by the district not the teacher.
Administrator know who their good teachers are. These are the educators that offer parents and students a learning environment that they are satisfied with. When administrators get an overabundance of complaints concerning a particular teacher, perhaps what should be considered is a peer review. Using retired master teachers to evaluate a troubled classroom would add a different perspective to the evaluation process. A master teacher could intercede and first do an analysis of the general make up of the class. If there is a large percentage of special needs children along with discipline problems and ELL students, that has to be taken into consideration. Those are the factors that put a drag on the class and can affect learning. The composition of a class can have a detrimental effect on those students who want to learn. And yes, the teacher can be at fault in which case the master teacher would act as a coach or mentor until the classroom environment improves.
A peer review system is much more comprehensive than looking at percentages and would constitute a much more equitable approach to teacher evaluations. Simply looking at a number tells you nothing about the ability of the teacher, however, it speaks volumes about the ignorance of our politicians. Teachers, more than anyone, want to weed out incompetence. We truly care about our students, and want them to become productive citizens. The future of our country depends on it. It is the reason why we became teachers in the first place. We, above all others, would never protect incompetence and we above all others, have the ability to recognize it. Wake up, America!
Thursday, November 3, 2011
The Teacher As a Doormat
Teachers are good little soldiers. We do what we are told even if it is against our better judgement. If we speak up to the powers that be and let them know that a program won't work, it falls upon deaf ears. There had been times in my own career, which spanned four decades, that teachers were force-fed a new strategy for teaching a particular subject and had to witness a generation of students lose ground before another fad appeared. If you want to know what is wrong with our system of education in this country, place some of the blame on the complacency of the public school teacher. In retrospect, I should have made more noise, and organized my colleages to demand more of a seat at the table.
If you present a methodology that is opposed by the majority of you teachers, it is doomed to failure. Superintendents and building administrators don't understand that statement. They think they can mandate a system of learning to their faculty and it will just happen. Applying this business model to education just doesn't work. The teacher is entrusted with an awesome responsibility that takes place behind closed doors. They cannot be monitored every minute of the day. There is a blind trust that takes place in those classrooms and teachers cannot sell to their students what they believe is wrong.
So now we are being judged on the test scores of our students as if that is the true measure of a good teacher. In reality, testing may be the measure of the materials and methodology forced upon us by the administration. Maybe they should be judged by those test scores. After all, teachers just deliver the program, material, and text selected by the administration, we are just the worker bees.
Testing was once used to evaluate the programs of study chosen by the district, not the teacher. Teachers do the best they can to deliver kowledge to their students, however, when students don't have any interest in learning, don't cooperate, don't do their homework, don't have the ability or background in some cases, don't study, and don't care, is it the teacher's fault? If a doctor prescribes medication and the patient refuses to take it, does the doctor get judged because the patient does not improve? The idea of evaluating teachers on the scores of their students is just as absurd.
Teachers constantly evaluate their students on material covered in their classrooms. They don't need a state test to let them know who is learning. When a student is doing poorly, teachers inform the parents and administrators that there is a problem. It is called a progress report or report card! When parents refuse to take responsibility for their child's lack of effort and when the school does not allocate the resources to grant a struggling student extra support, why should the teacher be the one to be evaluated? Teachers know if there is a problem with learning within the first week of school and they don't need a state test to figure it out. When the student, parents, and school district are not doing their jobs, why should the classrom teacher be the only one held responsible?
Evaluating teachers according to state test scores is so wrong on so many different levels. Some students will fill in any answer to be the first one done, some will fill in any answer because time is running out, and some will just leave it blank because they don't care. Meanwhile, a teacher's career may hang in the balance. Applying this business model to the teaching-learning process is a disgrace, and it shows a lack of respect for the profession. But teachers will just passively accept this new model without objection. They shrug their shoulders and feel powerless.
The politicians who make these rules have never taught in a classroom. Most administrators have had very limited time in the classroom. In fact, the commissioners, Board of Regents, and the Secretary of Education have no experience teaching or very little time in the classroom. Yet these are the people we have making the rules that will affect our classrooms, our jobs, and ultimately our students. After all this testing, why is it that colleges need to offer remediation to incoming freshmen and the SAT scores continue to decline?
More testing is not the answer, it is the problem. Pretesting, test preparation, state testing, and the actual testing in the classroom is rediculous but teachers will just follow orders like good, little soldiers. Until teachers rise up in protest, nothing will change. We need to express our outrage more vocally through demonstrations at school board meetings and PTA meetings. We need to inform the public that testing our children is not in their best interests, in fact, it is hurting our students. Overtesting is a detriment to learning and should never be used to evaluate teachers. We are turning our children off to the joy of learning because of all this testing and we have managed to suck the joy out of teaching. Wake up, America!
If you present a methodology that is opposed by the majority of you teachers, it is doomed to failure. Superintendents and building administrators don't understand that statement. They think they can mandate a system of learning to their faculty and it will just happen. Applying this business model to education just doesn't work. The teacher is entrusted with an awesome responsibility that takes place behind closed doors. They cannot be monitored every minute of the day. There is a blind trust that takes place in those classrooms and teachers cannot sell to their students what they believe is wrong.
So now we are being judged on the test scores of our students as if that is the true measure of a good teacher. In reality, testing may be the measure of the materials and methodology forced upon us by the administration. Maybe they should be judged by those test scores. After all, teachers just deliver the program, material, and text selected by the administration, we are just the worker bees.
Testing was once used to evaluate the programs of study chosen by the district, not the teacher. Teachers do the best they can to deliver kowledge to their students, however, when students don't have any interest in learning, don't cooperate, don't do their homework, don't have the ability or background in some cases, don't study, and don't care, is it the teacher's fault? If a doctor prescribes medication and the patient refuses to take it, does the doctor get judged because the patient does not improve? The idea of evaluating teachers on the scores of their students is just as absurd.
Teachers constantly evaluate their students on material covered in their classrooms. They don't need a state test to let them know who is learning. When a student is doing poorly, teachers inform the parents and administrators that there is a problem. It is called a progress report or report card! When parents refuse to take responsibility for their child's lack of effort and when the school does not allocate the resources to grant a struggling student extra support, why should the teacher be the one to be evaluated? Teachers know if there is a problem with learning within the first week of school and they don't need a state test to figure it out. When the student, parents, and school district are not doing their jobs, why should the classrom teacher be the only one held responsible?
Evaluating teachers according to state test scores is so wrong on so many different levels. Some students will fill in any answer to be the first one done, some will fill in any answer because time is running out, and some will just leave it blank because they don't care. Meanwhile, a teacher's career may hang in the balance. Applying this business model to the teaching-learning process is a disgrace, and it shows a lack of respect for the profession. But teachers will just passively accept this new model without objection. They shrug their shoulders and feel powerless.
The politicians who make these rules have never taught in a classroom. Most administrators have had very limited time in the classroom. In fact, the commissioners, Board of Regents, and the Secretary of Education have no experience teaching or very little time in the classroom. Yet these are the people we have making the rules that will affect our classrooms, our jobs, and ultimately our students. After all this testing, why is it that colleges need to offer remediation to incoming freshmen and the SAT scores continue to decline?
More testing is not the answer, it is the problem. Pretesting, test preparation, state testing, and the actual testing in the classroom is rediculous but teachers will just follow orders like good, little soldiers. Until teachers rise up in protest, nothing will change. We need to express our outrage more vocally through demonstrations at school board meetings and PTA meetings. We need to inform the public that testing our children is not in their best interests, in fact, it is hurting our students. Overtesting is a detriment to learning and should never be used to evaluate teachers. We are turning our children off to the joy of learning because of all this testing and we have managed to suck the joy out of teaching. Wake up, America!
Finally, the Principals Have Principles
Perhaps it is the spirit of the Occupy Wall Street protesters, but it is certainly praiseworthy that the principals of Long Island are taking a stand. For too long educators have been at the mercy of politicians and commissioners who have very little experience in the classroom. They make the rules for the new teacher evaluation system using a top down business model which doesn't work with educators. These administrators at the local level deserve credit for courageously and respectfully objecting to the use of student testing to evaluate teachers.
Tying test scores to the competency of a teacher is a ridiculous idea. There are just too many variables in a each classroom and even more from district to district. It is no surprise that students from affluent districts do better on state tests. Wealthy districts can supply their students with more test prep material, support staff, and parents who can afford private tutors. Does that mean their teachers are more competent? Those districts also have fewer students with special needs and/or English as a second language. Within a school, some teachers just end up with better students due to parental requests, while other teachers get students who are less capable or whose parents are not involved. Both teachers and administrators alike understand that when your job depends on a reading and math score, the other subjects take a back seat. In the end we only produce excellent test takers and the love of learning is lost.
Teachers need to support these principals who dared to speak up against an injustice. Educators across this land need to become more vocal and voice their opinions at PTA meetings, school board meetings, staff meetings, and in editorials. They need to demonstrate publicly in Albany and let their representatives know that this evaluation system will not be tolerated. If every teacher in the state signed a petition protesting this evaluation system, we could send a clear message to Albany that we are mad as hell, and we are not going to take anymore. It is time to rise up and be heard.
Tying test scores to the competency of a teacher is a ridiculous idea. There are just too many variables in a each classroom and even more from district to district. It is no surprise that students from affluent districts do better on state tests. Wealthy districts can supply their students with more test prep material, support staff, and parents who can afford private tutors. Does that mean their teachers are more competent? Those districts also have fewer students with special needs and/or English as a second language. Within a school, some teachers just end up with better students due to parental requests, while other teachers get students who are less capable or whose parents are not involved. Both teachers and administrators alike understand that when your job depends on a reading and math score, the other subjects take a back seat. In the end we only produce excellent test takers and the love of learning is lost.
Teachers need to support these principals who dared to speak up against an injustice. Educators across this land need to become more vocal and voice their opinions at PTA meetings, school board meetings, staff meetings, and in editorials. They need to demonstrate publicly in Albany and let their representatives know that this evaluation system will not be tolerated. If every teacher in the state signed a petition protesting this evaluation system, we could send a clear message to Albany that we are mad as hell, and we are not going to take anymore. It is time to rise up and be heard.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)