Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmy
Any ideas or you just think someone else should be able to figure it out? Let me know when you find one. I didn't say it can't be figured out, but so far it hasn't. Comparing student performance to sales is rather asinine in my opinion. The places where lousy teachers get to stay are the schools that don't have people in line to take the job. Good suburban school districts don't seem to be struggling for "good" teachers. The best Chicago teachers that haven't already, can head to the suburbs and test performance won't be an issue. How will that fix the problems in the city?
|
The reason it hasn’t been figured out so far is that the Unions will not let it.
Here’s a thought, give a standardized test the first week of school for that year grade level. Teacher teaches class throughout the year for the grade level. Give that same exact standardized test at the end of the year and look at how the scores improve. Not every kid will learn and improve. Most kids (with a competent teacher will have learned and will show improvement). A teacher should not be fired for a few bad eggs. If scores overall don’t improve much from the first time around, something is wrong and needs to be looked at. If most kids show improvement, there probably isn’t in issue. If most kids show no improvement year over year with a teacher or two out of the whole bunch, there is a problem. I don’t think it’s that difficult to figure out. The reason it hasn’t been figured out is that the teachers union seems to have a vice grip on these things and do not want teachers to be rated.