Posts
Saturday, February 28, 2009
The Truth is Stranger than Fiction Alert
Bill would stop schools from paying union leaders
By Lisa Schencker, The Salt Lake Tribune
http://www.sltrib.com/education/ci_11770116
“In this time of budget cuts, Utah school districts should not spend money on local teacher union leaders, says one lawmaker…”
Really? This is standard practice? It seems that Utah school districts contribute to the salaries of teacher union leaders who no longer teach and do not work for the district. If I was a Utah taxpayer this would be the stick I would use to beat districts with every time the question of a tax increase came up.
Though I am not a proponent of unions, I am not opposed to them. But they exist to advocate for their members, and as such should be funded by members. Even more incredulously, a local union president defends the practice.
After reading the article, the wisdom of E. Don Brown once again rings true, “the only pure advocate in the system for students is the building principal. At even given time, everyone else in the system has a vested interest that can easily outweigh the needs of the kids.”
Your turn…
Friday, February 27, 2009
The Truth is Stranger than Fiction Alert
Teachers Could Be Charged for Staging Pot Sting
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29402700/
Yes, the headline says it all.
No, actually it doesn’t. The actual story is even more ridiculous than the headline. Teachers are not to be blamed for hatching this genius scheme. It was school administrators.
As a group, a principal, an assistant principal and a dean thought it would be a good idea to enlist a student to solicit undercover drug deals on their campus. Thankfully, these keystone cops were stopped before anybody was seriously hurt.
Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy.
Your turn...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29402700/
Yes, the headline says it all.
No, actually it doesn’t. The actual story is even more ridiculous than the headline. Teachers are not to be blamed for hatching this genius scheme. It was school administrators.
As a group, a principal, an assistant principal and a dean thought it would be a good idea to enlist a student to solicit undercover drug deals on their campus. Thankfully, these keystone cops were stopped before anybody was seriously hurt.
Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy.
Your turn...
Lone Finalist Named for Austin ISD (Texas)
The Austin ISD school board has announced that Dr. Meria Carstarphen has been named as the lone finalist for position of superintendent. Currently, she is the superintendent of St. Paul Public Schools (Minn.).
St. Paul Public Schools is the largest district in the state, serving a little more than 38,000 students.
St. Paul Public Schools is the largest district in the state, serving a little more than 38,000 students.
More on RIF's
I recently read an opinion piece where the author was advocating for the continued use of seniority based systems (last hired, first fired) for making RIF (Reduction in Force) decisions, because she felt that it is too difficult to objectively evaluate teachers. That is patently not true. Here is the short course on objectively evaluating teachers.
1. Implement short-term common assessments
2. Disaggregate short-term and long term assessment data to showcase the performance of the most academically fragile students on the campus.
3. Over time, identify the teachers whose academically fragile students make either the biggest or most consistent gains. This is the pool of the most instructionally sound teachers on the campus.
4. Over time, identify the teachers whose academically fragile students make either the least or most inconsistent gains. This is the pool of the least instructionally sound teachers on the campus.
5. After analyzing the performance data of academically fragile students, then add some weight to the following staff performance criteria:
· Attendance
· Punctuality
· Student behavior
· Meeting deadlines
· Team collaboration
· Certifications
· Following proceedures
At this point, it should be clear who should be RIF’ed and who should remain. The decision still won’t be easy, but it will be based on what is best for the campus, the students and the remaining staff.
Your turn…
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Improving Schools: Campus Based Degree of Difficulty
In my day job, I help districts and school improve performance, rapidly. By rapidly, I mean that we expect to see measurable results in one semester or less. And we have an extensive track record that shows that we are good at what we do. (For more information you can visit, www.r4group.org). I only mention my day job, to let you know that the following opinion is based on a lot of field experience in a lot of settings.
If you are a school leader that is trying to change adult practice on your campus to improve student performance, the current perceived performance of your campus can make your job easier or soul crushingly difficult. Here’s how it stacks up, in order of difficulty. I will use the Texas ranking system, only because it does a good job of creating distinct categories.
# 5 in Degree of Difficulty – The Unacceptable Campus: This campus is the easiest in which to effect change. There’s no question that it is broke and the staff realize that their jobs are at stake, so they are open to new ideas that show promise.
# 4 in Degree of Difficulty – The Campus That Just Had Its Rating Drop: This campus has pride on the line. Even if they are blaming the drop on external factors, the staff is generally open to trying something new.
# 3 in Degree of Difficulty – The Acceptable Campus: This campus isn’t considered broke, but the staff would like the breathing room and perks of being recognized.
# 2 in Degree of Difficulty – The Exemplary Campus: The top of the pyramid in Texas. The staff on this campus have a lot of pride, know how tenuous their position is and are generally willing to work to stay at the top of the heap.
# 1 in Degree of Difficulty – The Long Time Recognized Campus: This campus isn’t broke and the staff is generally very comfortable. This campus often engages in a lot of what I call “superstitious” activities. The staff doesn't know exactly what it is that they do that actually impacts their rating so they are unwilling to change anything. If the staff does believe in change, it usually revolves around some other teacher, grade or department changing, because they are obviously doing their part.
So there’s my list. What do you think?
Your turn…
If you are a school leader that is trying to change adult practice on your campus to improve student performance, the current perceived performance of your campus can make your job easier or soul crushingly difficult. Here’s how it stacks up, in order of difficulty. I will use the Texas ranking system, only because it does a good job of creating distinct categories.
# 5 in Degree of Difficulty – The Unacceptable Campus: This campus is the easiest in which to effect change. There’s no question that it is broke and the staff realize that their jobs are at stake, so they are open to new ideas that show promise.
# 4 in Degree of Difficulty – The Campus That Just Had Its Rating Drop: This campus has pride on the line. Even if they are blaming the drop on external factors, the staff is generally open to trying something new.
# 3 in Degree of Difficulty – The Acceptable Campus: This campus isn’t considered broke, but the staff would like the breathing room and perks of being recognized.
# 2 in Degree of Difficulty – The Exemplary Campus: The top of the pyramid in Texas. The staff on this campus have a lot of pride, know how tenuous their position is and are generally willing to work to stay at the top of the heap.
# 1 in Degree of Difficulty – The Long Time Recognized Campus: This campus isn’t broke and the staff is generally very comfortable. This campus often engages in a lot of what I call “superstitious” activities. The staff doesn't know exactly what it is that they do that actually impacts their rating so they are unwilling to change anything. If the staff does believe in change, it usually revolves around some other teacher, grade or department changing, because they are obviously doing their part.
So there’s my list. What do you think?
Your turn…
Accountability is a Good Thing, However...
This post was inspired by:
Miss. House OKs bill aimed at improving schools - http://www.sunherald.com/218/story/1127873.html
JACKSON, Miss. -- Supporters say a bill that cleared the Mississippi House on Monday would force public schools to meet higher standards of accountability.
Here is my position in the accountability debate:
1) Accountability benefits children. When we as educators have to reflect on our practice in terms of improving student performance, that is a good thing. I can tell you from first hand observation and experience, the needs of poor and minority students are better met when jobs are at stake.
2) Accountability has to have a value added component. If it does not, then in practical terms there is a double standard. Without a value added component, schools and teachers that serve poor and minority students are forced to adapt and improve to survive. Schools and teachers that serve high SES students can choose to adapt if they want to. A fair system would ensure that every school is accountable for improvement.
3) Accountability without the tools and resources to make it happen is an almost impossible task. At the very minimum, schools and teachers must be provided with scope and sequence support, basic data disaggregation tools, and implementation time.
4) No matter what the accountability standard, the raw numbers don’t come close to telling the whole story. Look for the schools, principals and teachers who significantly out perform their peers. That’s where the real improvement lessons reside.
Your turn…
Miss. House OKs bill aimed at improving schools - http://www.sunherald.com/218/story/1127873.html
JACKSON, Miss. -- Supporters say a bill that cleared the Mississippi House on Monday would force public schools to meet higher standards of accountability.
Here is my position in the accountability debate:
1) Accountability benefits children. When we as educators have to reflect on our practice in terms of improving student performance, that is a good thing. I can tell you from first hand observation and experience, the needs of poor and minority students are better met when jobs are at stake.
2) Accountability has to have a value added component. If it does not, then in practical terms there is a double standard. Without a value added component, schools and teachers that serve poor and minority students are forced to adapt and improve to survive. Schools and teachers that serve high SES students can choose to adapt if they want to. A fair system would ensure that every school is accountable for improvement.
3) Accountability without the tools and resources to make it happen is an almost impossible task. At the very minimum, schools and teachers must be provided with scope and sequence support, basic data disaggregation tools, and implementation time.
4) No matter what the accountability standard, the raw numbers don’t come close to telling the whole story. Look for the schools, principals and teachers who significantly out perform their peers. That’s where the real improvement lessons reside.
Your turn…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)