Speaking of Leonard Pitts...he inks a column today discussing the perils of what the new First Family must be facing as they wrestle with the question of going public or private with their daughters (they already attend the private, much-famed Latin School of Chicago).Pitts decries teacher unions in his column, saying:
...Michelle Rhee. You might not know the name yet, but I'm betting you soon will. She is the Washington, D.C., schools chief who has drawn national attention for an audacious attempt to remake some of the nation's worst schools.
Among the changes she has instituted, or is attempting to institute, is a cash reward for students who meet certain benchmarks of performance and attendance. She also wants to make it easier to fire teachers who do not perform; under her plan, educators would give up tenure protections for a merit plan that would allow the best of them -- those whose students actually learn something -- to earn upward of $100,000 a year.
Rhee's proposals track closely with some of what I found last year when I wrote a series of columns on "What Works" to improve education for at-risk young people. Many educators told me that high on their wish list would be the ability to reward good teachers and fire bad ones.
You'd think it would be a no-brainer that people who don't perform get the ax and those who do get raises. Isn't that the way it works in most non-unionized professions? But the teachers union apparently exists in some alternate universe where everyone is rewarded equally regardless of the quality of their work. So it has fought Rhee with bitter tenacity, seeking to block her at every step.
*********************
My friend Doug Clark over at the N&R apparently agrees with Mr. Pitts. In a blog entry today, Clark writes:
Look, I'm for paying good teachers more. That's to my benefit. But I'm more concerned about how well children are educated. On that point, I agree wholeheartedly with Pitts: Reward teachers for teaching well. Get rid of those who don't.
The trouble is, these decisions are made by leaders who are beholden to organizations like NCAE, which help elect them.
Let me be clear: NCAE is an excellent advocate for its members. If a teacher is accused of some trumped-up offense, it will stand behind her 100 percent. I'm happy my wife belongs.
But I don't want NCAE dictating educational policies.
Individual teachers should have a say in school-based decisions. They should have flexibility in how they teach. They should be empowered.
Collectively, however, NCAE or unions are about what's best for teachers.
That's not necessarily what's best of education.
**************************
It is true that ALL stakeholders have a responsibility when it comes to our children, even the children of the new First Family. But when it comes to my daughter, I don't want some bureaucrat in Raleigh OR in Washington telling me what's best for my child. And I will continue to say that it is high-stakes NCLB-testing that is ruining public education.
Case in point...the following was passed out at an EOG Parents night last week at my daughter's school:
"Third Grade Gateway"
In May, every third grade student will take a Reading and Math End of Grade Test. Students must score a III or a IV on this test.
Students scoring a I or II will have a short period of review. These students will retake the EOG before the end of school.
The student will only retake the part he or she did not pass.
Summer School is MANDATORY for any students who did not pass the EOG Test on the second attempt.
Students will take the EOG a third time at the end of the summer session. A team of teachers and administrators will review each case individually to determine placement for the next school year.
Students who do not attend summer school will repeat the grade from the previous year.
************************
Third graders...eight-year-olds. In 2008 America. Something's not right.
I'm all for accountability in our public schools. But I'm not for high-stakes testing. I object to test scores being deliberately used to either place our children, classify our children, or hold our children back. I object to test scores being used to garner the most federal dollars. I object to test scores being used to fire teachers (especially those good new teachers out there who really care about children and who go into the classroom to attempt to make a difference). I object to the non-teaching of concepts in favor of teaching kids how to take a test.
Something's wrong. And it must be fixed.
E.C. :)
Posts
3 comments:
The bulk of the blame rests with absent parents, a vile "Hip-Hop" culture, and a "hands tied" school system who's only solution is to throw money at teachers and "dumb down" students as the need arises. Leonard Pitts is just that, the pitts, he's a typical black in denial, blameing anything or anyone except reality.
On my old blog site (prior to the elections), I featured Bill Cosby's "Come on People," in which Dr. Cosby challenges Black America to become involved in the education of their children. So while there are some valid points in your comment, I'm not so sure I would call him a "typical black in denial." Pitts (and the N&R's Doug Clark) both make good points about where the blame should lie, but as I said earlier, all of the stakeholders shoulder both the blame and the responsibility of the education of our children.
I have a third-grader too E.C. and I agree that testing is completely out of control. First come the Pre-EOG's...then the benchmarks...next the CogAt's...then more assessments and benchmarks. My bright son who loves to learn is just now being taught new material and it's NOVEMBER! I am saddened by how all this testing is taking the wind out of his sails. I am also saddened that we lost another good teacher at our school because she took a job at a private school where she enrolled her child so that the child wouldn't have to endure all the testing.
Post a Comment