Weekly Video is Up!

See video on Education Reform in the News.  

Education reform has been in the news a lot lately in North Carolina, and apparently all around the nation. This is the first year that I have been a member of National Education Association, a professional organization for teachers.  I received my first-ever NEA Today magazine this week and was excited to see that the cover highlighted a story "Fact Checking School Reform."

In this class we have discussed public education recently and thought that this would be relevant.  

High Stakes Testing - The article concluded that high-stakes testing, especially post - No Child Left Behind, has had little to no effect on achievement. Look at this diagram from the "Nation's Report Card" on long-term trends. Can you tell when NCLB was enacted? I sure can't... This is roughly the age group I teach - 17 year olds.  Standardized tests are NOT WORKING!!!

Value-Added Measures - In theory, one can look at a student's EOG/EOC score from the previous year, then look at their score from that year and determine how much "value" was added by their current teacher.  This may be more effective in lower grades when the same teacher has the same students for an entire year and their is a clearly defined curriculum in each successive grade.  However, in the high school environment, particularly Civics and Economics, students have had little to no instruction about US government, NC government, and economics previous to my class.  My question is - how will we have a "starting point" from which to measure the value I add?  This system just seems to flawed. The NEA article agrees and says that a third party could not tell an ineffective teacher from an effective teacher by looking at their value-added scores alone.  

Performance Based Pay - The above idea of value-added measures were supposed to be the saving grace for failing performance based pay initiatives.  School districts across the nation have tried this, realized it doesn't work, and moved on. So why is NC moving backward?  In a recent legislative update, teachers were alerted that an "alternative pay" system was being discussed.  Although our current system is not perfect, it is better than paying teachers for test scores.  Currently we are supposed to get paid based on years of teaching experience, the longer you teach, the more you're paid - seniority, a common system used for many things in society. (We have not received the 'step-up' for three years now, I am being paid as a 3rd year teacher when I am in my 6th year. :( )  What do we do with teachers who do not teach tested-subjects (chorus, art, PE, upper-levels of English/Math/Science)? There are too many variables for me to be comfortable with this idea.  Mainly, I believe that students (especially at the high school level) decide the extent of their learning.  What are we to do with students who never look at notes, a book outside of class? Never prepare for tests/quizzes? Never turn in homework?  Opponents would say, why have you not motivated this student more?  I would answer - why do I have 90 students each semester, 180 each year?  


Charter Schools - I'm not familiar but wanted to throw this one in there in light of our discussion on Senate Bill 8.  The NEA article's conclusion was that students at most charter schools score the same or lower than comparable students in regular public schools.  It highlighted a successful program, AVID, that is used in many public schools with proven results. 


Tenure - NEA's position - tenure protects teachers from un-fair treatment/firing.  My position - get rid of tenure so we can get rid of dead-weight teachers who are giving our profession a bad name.  Aha! Something I disagree with! Basically, I see too many bad teachers (even at my own school) who stay because it is so hard to fire someone with tenure.  So, lets do away with tenure, usher these bad apples out the door and welcome new teachers who actually want to educate.  My only reservation: NC is a right-to-work state which means w/out tenure, schools could eliminate someone's job without specific reason (i.e. not being based on that teacher's performance or job record).