The traditional response to these problems, avidly defended by teachers' unions, has been to offer tenure to teachers with a certain number of years on the job. To an extent, that solution works, in that it de-politicizes the act of teaching and provides some idependence, if not autonomy, for teachers to do their jobs.
Of course, the system also allows incompetent or lazy people to keep their jobs without the concern experienced in almost every other profession about adequate performance. I myself had some terrible teachers, at least one of whom was sleeping with his students, because tenure made it so difficult to move people on. As someone who works at an independent school, I am therefore grateful for the fact that tenure does not apply; we have been able to get people out when we need to do so.
Fairly assessing the actual performance of teachers is not so easy, though. Unlike most other professions, teaching can only be evaluated secondarily; that is, we judge the effectiveness of teachers through the actions of someone else -- the students. Teachers can say with justification that test scores don't accurately measure what they are doing because it is the kids, not the instructor, who must do the job, in the end. Start with students with less talent, with fewer resources, with trouble at home, with inadequate nutrition and you will end with lower scores.
That's why efforts to include classroom visits and other tools in evaluations makes so much sense. Intimidating as these approaches can be, teachers must face accountability for what they actually do. As Education Secretary Arne Duncan noted, “When everyone is treated the same, I can’t think of a more demeaning way of treating people... Far, far too few teachers receive honest feedback on what they’re doing.”
It's time for teachers to see themselves as professionals rather than tradesmen. Standards matter, and we need to help craft and enforce those standards.
No comments:
Post a Comment