Teacher layoff by seniority or ability

[piasabird]

Unions always favor people with more seniority. They write this in their contracts. So you have to honor the contracts, unless you plan on breaking the union. I see no reason why you cant purposely extend the strike, and then if teachers make no concessions, just hire replacements.

There is no guarantee, in a strike, that the unions will get a better contract.

 

[Vette73]

The reason for forcing teachers to teach a certain way IS because of the bad ones. They are way more prevalent than you think. Hence the need for all those forced and standardized teaching methods. This way, no matter how bad and stupid the teacher is, there is a chance if they follow close enough the lesson plan laid out for them that the students might still learn something.





Marlin true metrics are taken over time. Not within a simple slice as you laid out. You should know this.

Performance metrics for teachers track students from before they enter the teachers class room and after.

For example...

Teacher A is a 4th grade teacher. She gets a student who through grades K-3rd has received all A's. Once entering 4th grade, the student starts churning out B's, C', and D's. This is now an indication, but not a performance problem since it is one student. Now after 4th grade, that student moves on and starts making A's again in 5th grade a beyond. Something now seems fishy. Now if it is the majority of students who are having this same problem with Teacher A as they pass that teacher's classroom, it is time to look at how they are teaching and grading from an arbiter. Perhaps it is something as simple as the teacher sucks at grading papers and not teaching. Once the problem has been verified though, then their performance is noted in their records.

On top of this, you add in student and parent evaluations. You add in peer reviews. You put a camera in every classroom to monitor classes as they are taught. Reviewers randomly screen classes through out the year.

ALL this can be done and give an accurate portrayal of a teacher's ability to teach students. The fact you are acting stupid on this is annoying.

You say you need time to tell yet people here think you can gauge it more quickly. Hence the don't get rid of new teachers over senior ones. But even your example needs at least 3-4 year before it could even be weighed out. Then there could be a change in books one year, new requirments from state/fed level, new subject matter from 1 grade to next, etc...

How am I acting stupid? Even your example will not work by itself unless you think testing a teacher over 4 years and not taking into account anything will work. And if we are tight on money where is all the extra cash gonna come from for the cameras and testing? They used peer review at my HS and the highest teacher in my math group was the worst. But she was also friends with other admins so no one wanted to get in her way. Then asking parents is dumb as their kid gets bad grade so it must be the teachers fault. So now the teacher gives easy test and over grades to get higher marks on parent reviews.

Your dumb example shows simple thought is just that, simple.

 

[her209]

Teacher A is a 4th grade teacher. She gets a student who through grades K-3rd has received all A's. Once entering 4th grade, the student starts churning out B's, C', and D's. This is now an indication, but not a performance problem since it is one student. Now after 4th grade, that student moves on and starts making A's again in 5th grade a beyond. Something now seems fishy. Now if it is the majority of students who are having this same problem with Teacher A as they pass that teacher's classroom, it is time to look at how they are teaching and grading from an arbiter. Perhaps it is something as simple as the teacher sucks at grading papers and not teaching. Once the problem has been verified though, then their performance is noted in their records.

This is a terrible metric for determining when to evaluate teacher performance. All you're doing is encouraging teachers to grade easier and punishing teachers who actually want their students to learn the material.

 

[Exterous]

Teacher A is a 4th grade teacher. She gets a student who through grades K-3rd has received all A's. Once entering 4th grade, the student starts churning out B's, C', and D's. This is now an indication, but not a performance problem since it is one student. Now after 4th grade, that student moves on and starts making A's again in 5th grade a beyond. Something now seems fishy. Now if it is the majority of students who are having this same problem with Teacher A as they pass that teacher's classroom, it is time to look at how they are teaching and grading from an arbiter. Perhaps it is something as simple as the teacher sucks at grading papers and not teaching. Once the problem has been verified though, then their performance is noted in their records.

Yeah - because it's not possible for the 3rd grade teacher to suck and give easy grades. Thus the 4th grade teacher is stuck with children that do not have a good grasp on the subjects. But the 4th grade teacher is so good they get the kids squared away in time for 5th grade.

Tough shit good teacher. Humblepie says your performance is bad

This is a terrible metric for determining when to evaluate teacher performance. All you're doing is encouraging teachers to grade easier and punishing teachers who actually want their students to learn the material.

This too

 

[HumblePie]

This is a terrible metric for determining when to evaluate teacher performance. All you're doing is encouraging teachers to grade easier and punishing teachers who actually want their students to learn the material.

err, actually this is being done in many school systems. And it's not just the grades that the teachers are giving out. It is also the grades from standardized tests are being used. If a teacher is grading easier, the results will show in the standardized tests with discrepancy between the two.


As for Marlin, yes it takes time to weed out unproductive or bad teachers. But once a bad teacher has been established, if there is time to correct it then do so. If not, boot them. It's simple. As for new teachers, unless there is a specific complaint that needs investigating, there is NO REASON to fire them. Actually it is more cost effective to keep them on.

If once all the bad teachers are let go during a lay off for budget reasons, and more still need to be fired, THEN I support senority for determining who goes and who stays. If you are left with two acceptable performing teachers, it is harder to gauge how much more acceptable a new teacher is over an older one that is performing.

As for cameras, umm, you don't need a camera in every room either. A few per school hidden behind a "black box" that gets changed around is more than sufficient to accomplish this task. It would not be expensive either as I know many poor schools that have done this not only in class rooms but on busses as well. You are acting stupid because you are failing to use the logic I know you are capable of using to think this through. There are many other ways to measure a teachers performance, some more cost effective and faster than others, but the fact that you can't think of them doesn't mean squat unless you are in the field. Here is a list of some ways, but by no means is this list all inclusive, that teacher performance is tracked in different places.

1) Tracking student performance both in grades and standardized test
2) Tracking student and parental feedback
3) Random screening either through camera's or walk ins
4) Peer reviews from other teachers
5) Workshops and testing on teachers to grade their knowledge from time to time on how to teach

There are other ways and combined they give a more accurate picture.

 

[werepossum]

Stop blaming teachers for heavens sake.

Teachers are basically told what to teach, how to teach it, and when to teach it. There is very little creativity allowed. How about blaming those that make everything about 1 test every year rather than the individual needs of students.

Why not blame the leaders of education. Things use to be better - you know why? There were better leaders.

The individual needs of the students are to learn what's on the damned tests. American children come into the public school system at or near the top internationally, yet the longer they stay in the public school system the poorer they do on standardized tests.

 

[Zebo]

In the real world Zebo does not know the 98% of teachers that are good at their job and needs to stop spreading FUD which is based on 2% of the teachers who suck and of the union leaders.

I'm sure 98% are good. Doesn't change the fact their union(s) and actions with disproportionate leverage FDR warned about are putting states and munis in the red. Poster I was responding to acted like they are not to blame when they are.

 

[silverpig]

Such as?

One of the worst teachers I had in HS was highly ranked but she gamed the system and knew how it worked.

The BEST teacher I had in public school was not well liked and I got a C in her class, but she was a better teacher than even the ones I got As in. Not sure how she ranked but you can't look at just grades, or opinions, etc... to see who is able to get the most out of students.

My point is I like to see what people thik are god ways to decide who is good and not. Yet some are easy to see who is bad. But even ones that some think are bad are good.

First, the admin at each school KNOW who the good teachers are. The parents KNOW who the good teachers are. The students KNOW who the good teachers are. The admin can't do anything about it because of the unions.

Second, you can determine the value of a teacher by looking at the outcomes of students. Don't base it on one year, but look at the results each year for students down the line. Let's say teacher A and teacher B teach the same subject and grade. They have students who get certain grades that year and came in with a certain average and a certain previous record. These students then go on in subsequent years to perform at a certain level. You can calculate the impact of the teacher on the performance of those students as the years go on. This type of thing has been done before and is quite interesting.

You can then normalize across districts/schools/cities/etc where demographics and economics play a role (teachers in rich native english speaking neighbourhoods shouldn't get bonuses over a hard working teacher in a poor immigrant neighbourhood for example).

It's not a 5 minute analysis in excel by any means, but it can be done.

 

[PoAT.PaN]

In a perfect word it would be by ability. I take issue with tenure and unions for that fact. Should some industries be regulated when safety is at stake? Yes, they should and that is why OSHA exists. Other than that why not let your pay reflect your ability. I'm all for merit based everything. You bust your butt and do good work, you should be rewarded, whether that means you get a raise, a scholarship or you get to keep your job.

 

[Darwin333]

LOL, if you don't lay-off by senority, then how do you decide who is and isn't a good teacher? By looks, breast size, the ability suck up, or a combination of all three?

Is that a serious question or do I need to change the batteries in my sarcasm meter?

 

[charrison]

As with any profession, performance metric may be difficult but they are not impossible.

1. Do they show up to work. If they are out too much there could be a problem.
2. Are the grades that are assigned to the student match up standardized testing.
3. Does standardized testing show the desired progression in relation to their peers.
4. What do parents, students and admins think of a teacher, more subjective but still important.

These are 4 metrics that are easily obtainable to determine who is doing their jobs the best.

 

[piasabird]

I think they should fire the most senior or highest paid first.

Just break the union and hire teachers right out of college, or those willing to cross the picket line.

 

[DJK Frank 16]

And people wonder why the economy is the way it is... teachers with 35 years in that should retire are retaining jobs when 2nd and 3rd year teachers are losing theirs. That's a good way to pump the economy.

Those older teachers are the ones that are already established in life and are chucking money away to retire. The younger teachers are the ones that are going to take their pay check and go out and stimulate the economy.

 

[Exterous]

First, the admin at each school KNOW who the good teachers are. The parents KNOW who the good teachers are. The students KNOW who the good teachers are. The admin can't do anything about it because of the unions.

I think you grossly over estimate the ability of our school administrators and underplay the politics involved. (Some of it is inherent. It will be harder for an administrator to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of a subject outside of their comfort zone. For example: How you teach a high school forgein language class different than a physics class.)

Second - what parents/students do we listen to? Obviously if there is a complete consensus across the board the decision is easy. However, what % of parents/students have to say something for it to matter? These are the nitty gritty details that everyone leaves out of the discussion. In my experience inner city/poor schools have less parents that care about education and higher reports of 'bad teachers' 'teachers hating their child'. Do your reporting values take this into consideration? If so, at what weight?

Do kids that are, historically, are bad performers have less weight in evaluating teachers? What if a teacher gets stuck with a bad group of kids for just one year? Two years? How many years does it take to prove/disprove that it was just that year?

What about changes in curriculum or state requirements? It is not uncommon to have significant changes in the teaching requirements for the next school year. Do those years get weighted differently? If so, how?

You can then normalize across districts/schools/cities/etc where demographics and economics play a role (teachers in rich native english speaking neighborhoods shouldn't get bonuses over a hard working teacher in a poor immigrant neighborhood for example).
[\quote]

Different states - different schools even - have different rules and requirements for classes. My wife has taught Spanish and Math for 3 different schools. Each school had a generic Spanish I, Spanish II or Algebra I, II etc. Even so, the curriculum for one school was advancing the kids fast enough that the schools Spanish II program was roughly equivalent to the Spanish III course at the other school. Her Algebra I class in High School now covers what would have been Middle School math from another school.

How can we normalize performance measures across cities enough to warrant performance based employment when we can't even normalize our education system?

It's not a 5 minute analysis in excel by any means, but it can be done.

I completely agree. But that is not what we are seeing in the political arena. Sure there is some valuable discourse going on here but setting up a teacher performance metric with the state of our education system is hard. 'Everyone' is just taking the easy way out and blaming teachers/unions or blaming republicans/tea party etc. Actually getting teachers/administrators/politicians/parents to get off their high horses and figure the problem out is, apparently, too much to ask for.

 

[cwjerome]

Coming up with a teacher rubric is not some mysterious voodoo and it's not rocket science. What are the standards? What is the vision and mission? OK, design a scale to rate those characteristics that are expected from the teachers.

Can they design and plan instruction?
Can they create and maintain a learning climate?
Can they implement and manage instruction?
Can they assess learning and communicate results?
Can the collaborate with colleagues, parents, etc?
Can they manage classroom discipline?
Can they demonstrate current, deep content and professional knowledge?
Can they follow contractual expectations? (being on time, following laws, etc)

These things need to evaluated over the one-year time-frame in a structure that is fair and open, and incorporates due process. I don't know why people act like we can't somehow evaluate teachers. We can and we should.

 

[Exterous]

Coming up with a teacher rubric is not some mysterious voodoo and it's not rocket science. What are the standards? What is the vision and mission? OK, design a scale to rate those characteristics that are expected from the teachers.

Can they design and plan instruction?
Can they create and maintain a learning climate?
Can they implement and manage instruction?
Can they assess learning and communicate results?
Can the collaborate with colleagues, parents, etc?
Can they manage classroom discipline?
Can they demonstrate current, deep content and professional knowledge?
Can they follow contractual expectations? (being on time, following laws, etc)

These things need to evaluated over the one-year time-frame in a structure that is fair and open, and incorporates due process. I don't know why people act like we can't somehow evaluate teachers. We can and we should.

Do you have specific metrics to be verified and validated? Or is this just an overly general yes/no situation?

I don't know about you but I don't want my job performance to be rated on something so vague that different people can interpret it different ways. It's a horrible idea and I don't wish vague, undefined goals on anyone. If you use a multi person evaulation system, who gets the final word if people view the goals success criteria differently? Any decent goal should have definable, specific measurements to prevent abuse/mis understanding. Otherwise you can't defend/assert your merits if you and your appraiser don't agree. You are completely dependant on your evaluator(s) being fair, unbiased and competant.

 

[cwjerome]

Do you have specific metrics to be verified and validated? Or is this just an overly general yes/no situation?

I don't know about you but I don't want my job performance to be rated on something so vague that different people can interpret it different ways. It's a horrible idea and I don't wish vague, undefined goals on anyone. If you use a multi person evaulation system, who gets the final word if people view the goals success criteria differently? Any decent goal should have definable, specific measurements to prevent abuse/mis understanding. Otherwise you can't defend/assert your merits if you and your appraiser don't agree. You are completely dependant on your evaluator(s) being fair, unbiased and competant.

Of course this wouldn't be a yes/no situation, and the fact that you would even suggest it tells me know have little knowledge or expertise in this area. It would be a scale, and where a teacher lands would be based on the preponderance of the evidence, based off a 6-8 month time span and possibly two separate raters in cases of poor performance. Something like "Can they design and plan instruction?" would be based off the quantity and quality of the required lesson plans that were turned in, observable data from walk-throughs, and other factors. That is just an example.

It doesn't have to be vague or undefined. There should be procedures and protections in place to mitigate the chances of personal bias. Paper trails, the ability to request a different rater, appeal to a board, etc, etc. Arizona passed a law last year that made it illegal for districts to fire/retain people based on seniority. As an educator for over 12 years I welcome it. I know I'm good. I'm good because I am reflective, motivated, educated, and professional. The only teachers that should be worried are the 5%ers who suck. Frankly, if there's a problem with a rater being unprofessional and unfair despite all the safeguards, that's a system error in the bureaucracy, not an indictment of the concept of evaluating workers.

Nationally things are changing and even some in NEA leadership are starting to realize that by protecting the bad teachers they are hurting the profession long term and damaging the quality of education for students. This is a good development and it's about time we quit worrying about the irrational insecurities of teachers afraid to step up and be counted.

 

[Exterous]

Of course this wouldn't be a yes/no situation, and the fact that you would even suggest it tells me know have little knowledge or expertise in this area.

Nice deflection. It was a question for you to answer so I can figure out how much knowledge you have in this area/interest in coming up with a valid solution. Unlike you, I do not like to make unsubstantiated assumptions about the person posting. (I do think there are those on the forum who would suggest a simple yes/no answer)

It doesn't have to be vague or undefined.

Nor should it be.

Frankly, if there's a problem with a rater being unprofessional and unfair despite all the safeguards, that's a system error in the bureaucracy, not an indictment of the concept of evaluating workers.

I am not sure if you bothered reading my other posts but my issue is that there are tons of bureaucratic obstacles (like this) that need to be resolved before I feel an accurate teacher performance metric can be established. Furthermore, it is my belief that without addressing these issues the teacher's unions will fight tooth an nail against any proposal for fear of being screwed by it. Can it be done? Absolutely. But a good system will take more interaction, discourse and hard work than people seem to be willing to put in

If you have been an educator for 12 years without running into the bureaucratic mess that is our public education system I congratulate you and recommend you play the lottery

Nationally things are changing and even some in NEA leadership are starting to realize that by protecting the bad teachers they are hurting the profession long term and damaging the quality of education for students. This is a good development and it's about time we quit worrying about the irrational insecurities of teachers afraid to step up and be counted.

I agree its a good development but their fears are far from irrational given some of the proposals regarding teacher performance grading. Recently LA released a data base grading teachers solely on their student's standardized test scores and there is Chicago's TAP program just to name a few

 

[silverpig]

I think you grossly over estimate the ability of our school administrators and underplay the politics involved. (Some of it is inherent. It will be harder for an administrator to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of a subject outside of their comfort zone. For example: How you teach a high school forgein language class different than a physics class.)

My wife told me that at all the schools she's worked at, the admin knows. Think about an office that you've worked at maybe. Everyone knows who the shitty worker is and who the hard workers are. I don't know about there, but admin here are moved from a school to another one every 4 years. It's long enough to get to know the teachers and implement some changes, but avoids the politics of a long-term posting.

Second - what parents/students do we listen to? Obviously if there is a complete consensus across the board the decision is easy.

Never said we had to listen to the parents/kids. The fact that they know who the good teachers are means that the fact is at least easily knowable. I remember hoping to hell I got into Mr. T's grade 6 class because everyone knew he was the best teacher at the school.

What about changes in curriculum or state requirements? It is not uncommon to have significant changes in the teaching requirements for the next school year. Do those years get weighted differently? If so, how?

This doesn't matter. So long as changes are known you can correct for them.

Different states - different schools even - have different rules and requirements for classes. My wife has taught Spanish and Math for 3 different schools. Each school had a generic Spanish I, Spanish II or Algebra I, II etc. Even so, the curriculum for one school was advancing the kids fast enough that the schools Spanish II program was roughly equivalent to the Spanish III course at the other school. Her Algebra I class in High School now covers what would have been Middle School math from another school.

How can we normalize performance measures across cities enough to warrant performance based employment when we can't even normalize our education system?

You do this the same way you normalize for students being different heights and weights. It doesn't matter. If you know what the guidelines are, you can correct for them.

 

[Exterous]

My wife told me that at all the schools she's worked at, the admin knows. Think about an office that you've worked at maybe. Everyone knows who the shitty worker is and who the hard workers are. I don't know about there, but admin here are moved from a school to another one every 4 years. It's long enough to get to know the teachers and implement some changes, but avoids the politics of a long-term posting.

Hah - at the school my wife works at the admin was clueless. He wasn't completely sure how to rate her because she was, at that time, teaching Spanish and he wasn't familiar with teaching a forgein language - he told her this. (Battle of anecdotal evidence and he is still an active admin despite having an affair with a subordinate). Around here the admins are, at most, moved between schools in the same district and there are a lot of internal politics about who gets moved where and for what reason.

Also - if we take offices that I have worked at - just because someone isn't a good employee and everyone knows it (accept, sometimes the boss. Other tiems they did know and they didn't grade down for various reasons) doesn't mean they don't do well on their review. I have seen too many crappy employees get kept on because they could work vague performance guidlines to their advantage (Yes I know every job has people who don't revuew employees the way they should. This is where specific detailed review/goal criteria comes in)

Never said we had to listen to the parents/kids. The fact that they know who the good teachers are means that the fact is at least easily knowable. I remember hoping to hell I got into Mr. T's grade 6 class because everyone knew he was the best teacher at the school.

If we don't listen to them what is the point in saying that kids and parents know who the good teachers are? If we don't listen to them their views should have no impact in this discussion at all

Look - I am not saying there are no clear cut cases. Are some teachers awesome because of merit and everyone knows it? Absolutely! Are some teachers awful and everyone knows it. Yes! And it is too hard to fire those teachers. The issue is that you cannot base performance metrics off of generalities. They leave too big of a gray area that is open to manipulation and interpretation (random musing: Maybe a recall system where if x% of parents and y% of admins think the teacher is bad they are fired. I think the x% of parents would have to be pretty high though...)

If everyone was awesome/acceptable/failure it would be easy. But there have to be guidelines about how poor a teacher needs to be before action/termination takes place. This is where it get difficult. The specific guidelines need to be well thought out and planned. You can't just use grades and standardized tests.

Student performance across grades is better but additional work needs to be done to deal with issues of grade inflation. Also you need to account for major curriculum changes. If the changes affect over x% of teaching days you get an additional y% of additional tolerance for low grades. Give additional leeway if kids don't do their homework. (Some subjects just require additional time to get right. It's not the teacher's fault if the kid doesn't do assigned work at home) Stricter rules about kid's classroom behavior would be immensely helpful.

This doesn't matter. So long as changes are known you can correct for them.

That does matter unless your brand spanking new lesson plans are 100% perfect every school day.

You do this the same way you normalize for students being different heights and weights. It doesn't matter. If you know what the guidelines are, you can correct for them.

Comparing height and weight to teacher performance is not even close to the same. If it was we would have no issues. 5 seconds of measurement and done.

 

[Vette73]

Hah - at the school my wife works at the admin was clueless. He wasn't completely sure how to rate her because she was, at that time, teaching Spanish and he wasn't familiar with teaching a forgein language - he told her this. (Battle of anecdotal evidence and he is still an active admin despite having an affair with a subordinate). Around here the admins are, at most, moved between schools in the same district and there are a lot of internal politics about who gets moved where and for what reason.

Also - if we take offices that I have worked at - just because someone isn't a good employee and everyone knows it (accept, sometimes the boss. Other tiems they did know and they didn't grade down for various reasons) doesn't mean they don't do well on their review. I have seen too many crappy employees get kept on because they could work vague performance guidlines to their advantage



If we don't listen to them what is the point in saying that kids and parents know who the good teachers are? If we don't listen to them their views should have no impact in this discussion at all

Look - I am not saying there are no clear cut cases. Are some teachers awesome because of merit and everyone knows it? Absolutely! Are some teachers awful and everyone knows it. Yes! And it is too hard to fire those teachers. The issue is that you cannot base performance metrics off of generalities. They leave too big of a gray area that is open to manipulation and interpretation (random musing: Maybe a recall system where if x% of parents and y% of admins think the teacher is bad they are fired. I think the x% of parents would have to be pretty high though...)

If everyone was awesome/acceptable/failure it would be easy. But there have to be guidelines about how poor a teacher needs to be before action/termination takes place. This is where it get difficult. The specific guidelines need to be well thought out and planned. You can't just use grades and standardized tests.

Student performance across grades is better but additional work needs to be done to deal with issues of grade inflation. Also you need to account for major curriculum changes. If the changes affect over x% of teaching days you get an additional y% of additional tolerance for low grades. Give additional leeway if kids don't do their homework. (Some subjects just require additional time to get right. It's not the teacher's fault if the kid doesn't do assigned work at home) Stricter rules about kid's classroom behavior would be immensely helpful.




That does matter unless your brand spanking new lesson plans are right 100% of the time every school day.



Comparing height and weight to teacher performance is not even close to the same. If it was we would have no issues. 5 seconds of measurement and done.

Yep same for all the public schools I went to. That and Admins are rated on what percent of students pass each year. So its in their best interest too get as many students to the next grade. Hence why you hear about HS grads that can’t read.

My Latin teacher had the Principal tell her to give extra credit or test easier as to many students were not getting good grades and some parents complained.

I love how some think teachers are the problem yet the Admins know everything.

 

[cwjerome]

If you have been an educator for 12 years without running into the bureaucratic mess that is our public education system I congratulate you and recommend you play the lottery

I have run into bureaucratic mess... who hasn't in any large organization, in any type of job? But don't wait around expecting a 100% solution. Once you start going in the ability-based direction there will have to be a learning curve and self corrections. Nothing's easy. That said, some places might be ready for this more than others. I can see some seriously dysfunctional areas that might need more time to implement something along these lines but it's not an excuse to avoid it.

 

[piasabird]

Typically 4th grade is when school gets real. That is around the time that kids start doing multiplication and english gets harder.

There are no real national standards for education. The standards are set by the state and the local school districts. By keeping an artificially low standard, grades can be kept artificially high. Too bad students will not be ready for college attendance.

 

[Exterous]

I have run into bureaucratic mess... who hasn't in any large organization, in any type of job? But don't wait around expecting a 100% solution. Once you start going in the ability-based direction there will have to be a learning curve and self corrections. Nothing's easy. That said, some places might be ready for this more than others. I can see some seriously dysfunctional areas that might need more time to implement something along these lines but it's not an excuse to avoid it.

I am not sure as to the point in your post as a reply to mine. At no point did I say it needs to be 100% just more thought out than most of the proposed solutions currently are. I never said it should be avoided just more thought out.

 

[silverpig]

If we don't listen to them what is the point in saying that kids and parents know who the good teachers are? If we don't listen to them their views should have no impact in this discussion at all

The point was in the second sentence you quoted: "Never said we had to listen to the parents/kids. The fact that they know who the good teachers are means that the fact is at least easily knowable. I remember hoping to hell I got into Mr. T's grade 6 class because everyone knew he was the best teacher at the school."

Kids and parents know. The admin (usually) knows. Other teachers know. This isn't something that is difficult to determine because everyone knows who the good teachers are. That is the point. It isn't difficult to determine.

This thread is about laying off bad teachers first. Your argument is that it is impossible to identify bad teachers because it can't be measured. My argument is that however you measure it, it is easy to determine who the bad teachers are because kids, other teachers, admin, and parents know who they are. My point is that the problem exists because of the unions, not because it is impossible to know who to lay off first.

Student performance across grades is better but additional work needs to be done to deal with issues of grade inflation. Also you need to account for major curriculum changes. If the changes affect over x% of teaching days you get an additional y% of additional tolerance for low grades. Give additional leeway if kids don't do their homework. (Some subjects just require additional time to get right. It's not the teacher's fault if the kid doesn't do assigned work at home) Stricter rules about kid's classroom behavior would be immensely helpful.

All of that is very easy to do. If some teacher is always giving out easy grades, it will show up when that teacher's students get have A averages in that one year and then C+ averages in the next. Meanwhile, a teacher with a class in parallel has a B average class who then goes on to B averages the next year.

Curriculum changes are also very easy to take into account. If it affects all teachers, or some known subset, you can calculate that effect. Kids not doing their homework is also easy to take care of. If a teacher is at a school which is performing poorly because the demographics of the region mean that kids don't have the support at home that they need, that is adjusted for.

Comparing height and weight to teacher performance is not even close to the same. If it was we would have no issues. 5 seconds of measurement and done.

The point was that height and weight have as much to do with increasing difficulty in determining student outcomes as different cities do. It's easy to get rid of.