I will protect your pensions. Nothing about your pension is going to change when I am governor. - Chris Christie, "An Open Letter to the Teachers of NJ" October, 2009

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Things I Don't Learn About Education From Reading the Star Ledger

Things I don't learn from reading the Star-Ledger:
TRENTON — After nearly a century, the days of New Jersey teachers automatically earning tenure after a few years on the job could be over. 
[...] 
Instead of automatically earning tenure after three years and one day, teachers would earn job protection only if they are rated "effective" or "highly effective" for three consecutive years. Teachers could lose tenure after one or two years of poor evaluations.
What I didn't learn: That teachers don't "automatically" earn tenure, because districts can refuse to renew their contracts for the first three years and don't have to give any reason.


I also didn't learn that 50% of teachers leave after the first five years; isn't it reasonable to think a good percentage of those teachers were ones who didn't have their contracts renewed?
Teacher raises would be based primarily on whether their students perform well in the classroom. They could also up their pay if they teach in high-need schools or in subjects where there are teacher shortages, including science or bilingual education.
What I didn't learn: Studies have shown merit pay does not work.
But Robert Bumpus, executive county school superintendent for Salem and Gloucester counties, said he thinks teachers will warm up to the idea of tenure reform over time.
"If they really look at it and debate it," Bumpus said, "I think down deep inside they’re going to say this makes sense."
What I didn't learn: No one, to my knowledge, has shown any evidence that there are sizable numbers of "bad" teachers who have earned tenure currently teaching in our schools.
Teacher raises would be based primarily on whether their students perform well in the classroom. They could also up their pay if they teach in high-need schools or in subjects where there are teacher shortages, including science or bilingual education.
What I didn't learn:  All of the research into using standardized test scores with value-added modeling (VAM) to rate teachers shows the error rates are so high as to make the ratings effectively useless.
Under a plan introduced by Gov. Chris Christie’s education commissioner Wednesday, the state’s public school teachers would be assessed and paid using a new rating system based in part on how their students do in the classroom.
What I didn't learn: Chris Cerf has a very, very interesting history. One that should make anyone who is concerned with the future of education consider what he proposes very, very carefully.

Wow - there's a lot I didn't learn from reading the S-L...

2 comments:

calugg said...

Although this analysis is older than my cat Gilda, it does have some implications for today. See http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/cerai-01-19.htm

You might know of the author....

thinker said...

I'm confused. What are these "evaluations?" I know that in all the districts that I have worked as a substitute, new teachers (those without tenure) are evaluated three or four times a year for those first years before tenure is earned and at least once (usually more), thereafter. Typically, even tenured teachers are annually evaluated via observation at least once by their school principal and once by a district administrator of some sort. Is this not the norm? I don't understand why people have the idea that teachers are blithely going about their business with no oversight at all.