Not like factory workers; more like athletic trainers
As one who appreciates and often extols the power of analogical thinking, I’ve always been bothered by the furtive analogy made between teachers and factory workers. The concept of a teachers’ “union” can lead us toward the analogy, but in fact, students are not products in any meaningful sense. Nevertheless the false analogy tends to influence our thinking about the act of teaching, and especially about how to evaluate the success or failure of teachers.
Scott Olson / Getty Images
The proportion of standardized test results that makes up a teacher’s evaluation is at the heart of the strike in Chicago — now in its second week. Sophia Tareen’s AP story summarizes:
Chicago’s teachers have drawn the hardest line in recent memory against using student test scores to rate teacher performance. And Mayor Rahm Emanuel is pushing hard to implement the new evaluations. That clash is one of the main points of contention in a nasty contract dispute between Chicago Public Schools and the Chicago Teachers Union, which President Karen Lewis has called “a fight for the very soul of public education.”
In an opinion piece up today at the Huffington Post, I offer a counter-proposal for a more appropriate analogy and some conclusions about how that might affect how we think about teacher evaluations.
If we must make analogies to the act of educating, a better one would be thinking of a teacher like a trainer at a health club or fitness center — an analogy I owe to Randy Pausch’s book, The Last Lecture. Expanding on that analogy, how might we judge the quality of a trainer? By measuring the body fat, strength and conditioning of the students at the beginning and end of a semester’s aerobics class? I don’t think so. We wouldn’t find that fair because we inherently understand that the primary responsibility for fitness lies with the student. Certainly we would hope for some development overall in the trainer’s students’ fitness, just as we do with teachers.
But to evaluate the trainer before renewing an employment contract, we might rather observe: how the trainer creates an appropriate environment, inspires enthusiasm for fitness, creates structured activities for individuals and groups, demonstrates proper techniques, provides correction and encouragement, explains effectively the benefits and drawbacks of various exercises, utilizes appropriate and up-to-date technologies, offers some one-on-one attention with struggling students, and details what students can do at home to continue their development.
The whole piece is here.
I tend to think of teaching largely as a stand-up comedy. You have to be able to read the audience and, based on that read, to adjust or completely throw out your schtick and invent a whole new on on the spot.
Besides playing the crowd successfully, you also have to spot those individuals who just aren’t getting it or are disengaged and open a path to bring them in (kinowing that some of them won’t take the path).
And all of that is just what you have to do in the classroom.
Learning to grade papers effectively and be sensitive to changes in rhetorical strategies of each student that might indicate improvement or plagiarism is a whole other thing for which I really have no analogy.
Here’s Taylor Mali on “What Teachers Make.” Oldie but goodie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxsOVK4syxU
It’s the employer who determines what performance is satisfactory, not the employee and her family and friends. If politicians and parents and boards of education want specific results on specific tests at specific times, that’s it. No argument. All of us may feel that teaching to tests is a poor way to rear kids intellectually, but all of us don’t set the terms of the contract.
If there are too few prospective teachers to fill Chicago’s needs on Chicago’s terms, the mayor and the board will have to compromise. But if – as seems likely – there are enough prospective teachers willing to work under the new terms, the strikers would not seem to have a leg to stand on. Having waited until after school started to strike, they certainly have leverage, but maybe less than they’ve calculated.
Of course, this is a Democratic mayor, so he’ll likely bluster for the cameras but cave quietly soon enough. Which is probably for the best. Kids get a vacation, Mayor gets to look tough, teachers get a big pay raise and a softening on evaluations. Parents get a headache, but parents are used to headaches, and voters forget.
The strike is not about higher wages, but about teacher evaluation.
One way to measure teacher performance would be to take three measurements: Standardized tests, peer review (in my experience, often a more rigorous bar than testing), and student/parent evaluations.
At my school, part of the evaluation criteria for teachers collectively in their disciplines is on the performance of graduates on the job in their chosen fields. For example, if employers report our graduates do not have adequate written communication skills, we have to rethink our curriculum and methods.
Would suggest, Mr. Peppard, that you have missed the central point of the argument – it is not student test scores only. Rather, the city is arguing for a combination of elements (student test results being only 40% and on a skewed scale that takes into consideration the economics of the neighborhood, the diversity of students, first generation immigrants, language difficulties, prior year scores, etc.)
The key point is that some type of measure needs to be used and that the tool needs to be fair, balanced, and that the principal has the key input and decision making ability to direct the specific school and their staffing. (not some amphorous union – this is what the union is fighting against – it is a question of who has control and power)
Some of the key concerns in Chicago have to do with long term teachers who may or may not have advanced credentials; have been teaching based upon length of service (which doesn’t necessarily guarantee experience or results). These teachers are home grown, neighborhood and may have even attened these schools. So, on the one hand, you may lose some historcal ties but on the other hand, you gain teachers who may be more qualified and willing to be measured.
If tests don’t measure anything except the students’ ability to take a test, then why test them at all? Why bother to administer even non-standardized tests?
Everybody knows which teachers are good and which aren’t. The students know, the other teachers know, the principals know and the parents know. This was true before the advent of widespread standardized testing, and it’s true today. The problem isn’t determining which teachers are bad. The problem is that the bad ones can’t be removed from the classroom.
Michael, you’re surely right that the students’ family life is the strongest predictor of classroom success. I think everyone understands that. But given that fact, which can’t be changed in the short term, what do we do? We know that excellent teachers make a positive difference for students, even in poorly-performing schools. In those schools, doesn’t it become even *more* imperative to get those students an excellent teacher?
Michael, you’re right that public school teachers aren’t factory workers. It may be that your athletic trainer analogy has merit. But public school teachers are also something else: they are public servants. What does that term mean, if it doesn’t mean that their employment rights must be subordinated to the needs of those they serve?
“The problem isn’t determining which teachers are bad. The problem is that the bad ones can’t be removed from the classroom.” As a parent, I’m much more sympathetic to this ideas than I was as a childless adult. I regularly edit handouts that come home from the school and send copies to the principal and school board members. About 20 percent of my student hope to be teachers, and I warn them about parents like me.
I’m not particularly sympathetic to the strike, and I think the Chicago teachers have yet to make a compelling case for why they aren’t working to rule or using some other, less drastic strategy.
This piece on NPR this morning, which interviewed the teachers and explored mistrust between school board and teachers was somewhat enlightening. Listen now:
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=161325838&m=161330495
Or transcript will be up later today from this page:
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=3
Regarding standardized tests: here are some sample math problems for 3rd graders in Virginia, taken from an actual test a few years ago:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/education/no_child/math.html
And here are some sample reading problems – same level, same state:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/education/no_child/read.html
Just a couple of comments:
* These sorts of questions, particularly the math problems, seem quite familiar to me – speaking as a dad who helped his children get through 3rd grade. On the other hand, I don’t know that these were the sorts of problems I would have been given when I was a 3rd grader, many moons ago now. I think we mostly focused on adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing.
* I suspect these questions would be challenging for 3rd graders – I’d think that relatively few would ace an exam that asks these types of questions. It raises a number of questions about what the tests are trying to accomplish. I can imagine that a 3rd grade teacher wouldn’t want her competence measured by questions like these.