Ace, when you say resources, you are talking about money.

 

For decades, teachers have been saying "give me more resources, and we will deliver." Every single solitary year, more and more resources are given, and every single year, performance fails to deliver. Last budget year, 67% of Kentucky's state budget was spent on education. That is appalling, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Fiscal year before that, 63%. It goes up every year. How much money do you need?

 

It may very well be that households are broken, and that the teachers do not have the ability to repair them all, and it is in a downward spiral. Noone places all the blame on teachers or public schools for that fact. But the other fact is that students who want to learn and deserve better, the students that come from the more solid households, are suffering tremendously, in the classroom, in the subsequent job market, everywhere. If you don't see that then you are blind.

 

It is a question of choice. At some point you must choose to either go with bringing up the bottom end, or loosening the restrictions on the top end. Since, 1991, KERA has been doing the former and all I am saying it is now time to look at the latter. It has been almost 20 years.

 

The charter school amendment, as well as the other views of educational reform back to a voucher system, do the latter.

 

Coach, your comments are interesting. Nearly 20 years ago, the Department of Education thought that site-based councils, brought in with KERA, were the panacea for all that was ill with education. Now, they want them gone.

 

I totally and completely disagree with your second statement, they can be evaluated just as well as any other job or profession. Only teachers don't believe that teachers can be evaulated, which is not unusual, noone believes their own job can be effectively evaluated.

 

Hearsay, you are a lawyer.

Do you want to be evaluated based upon what your clients do?

 

Not you winning the case for them because that is something you have some control over. But rather what your clients do with the rest of their life?

 

That is the hard part of evaluating teachers.

Ace, when you say resources, you are talking about money.

 

For decades, teachers have been saying "give me more resources, and we will deliver." Every single solitary year, more and more resources are given, and every single year, performance fails to deliver. Last budget year, 67% of Kentucky's state budget was spent on education. That is appalling, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Fiscal year before that, 63%. It goes up every year. How much money do you need?

 

It may very well be that households are broken, and that the teachers do not have the ability to repair them all, and it is in a downward spiral. Noone places all the blame on teachers or public schools for that fact. But the other fact is that students who want to learn and deserve better, the students that come from the more solid households, are suffering tremendously, in the classroom, in the subsequent job market, everywhere. If you don't see that then you are blind.

 

It is a question of choice. At some point you must choose to either go with bringing up the bottom end, or loosening the restrictions on the top end. Since, 1991, KERA has been doing the former and all I am saying it is now time to look at the latter. It has been almost 20 years.

 

The charter school amendment, as well as the other views of educational reform back to a voucher system, do the latter.

 

Coach, your comments are interesting. Nearly 20 years ago, the Department of Education thought that site-based councils, brought in with KERA, were the panacea for all that was ill with education. Now, they want them gone.

 

I totally and completely disagree with your second statement, they can be evaluated just as well as any other job or profession. Only teachers don't believe that teachers can be evaulated, which is not unusual, noone believes their own job can be effectively evaluated.

 

I agree with this across the board, though I think our views on education differ at some level, which may influence how we respond to this last issue you raise. As an advocate of performance-based pay for teachers I've yet to see a metric that I consider merely adequate, let alone capable of incentivizing success. What do you consider an effective measure of teacher success?

Ace, when you say resources, you are talking about money.

 

For decades, teachers have been saying "give me more resources, and we will deliver." Every single solitary year, more and more resources are given, and every single year, performance fails to deliver. Last budget year, 67% of Kentucky's state budget was spent on education. That is appalling, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Fiscal year before that, 63%. It goes up every year. How much money do you need?

 

It may very well be that households are broken, and that the teachers do not have the ability to repair them all, and it is in a downward spiral. Noone places all the blame on teachers or public schools for that fact. But the other fact is that students who want to learn and deserve better, the students that come from the more solid households, are suffering tremendously, in the classroom, in the subsequent job market, everywhere. If you don't see that then you are blind.

 

It is a question of choice. At some point you must choose to either go with bringing up the bottom end, or loosening the restrictions on the top end. Since, 1991, KERA has been doing the former and all I am saying it is now time to look at the latter. It has been almost 20 years.

 

The charter school amendment, as well as the other views of educational reform back to a voucher system, do the latter.

 

Coach, your comments are interesting. Nearly 20 years ago, the Department of Education thought that site-based councils, brought in with KERA, were the panacea for all that was ill with education. Now, they want them gone.

 

I totally and completely disagree with your second statement, they can be evaluated just as well as any other job or profession. Only teachers don't believe that teachers can be evaulated, which is not unusual, noone believes their own job can be effectively evaluated.

 

As for site-base they often talk about things unrelated to instruction. I served on one and all that was discussed was copy paper and teachers using to much. At that time I had no idea what site-base was about. Since that time I have talked with several attended several site base meetings and still the same old thing is discussed ........nothing that involves instruction.

 

As for teacher evaluation

Yes you can evaluate if the have control of the class, or if the are following lesson plans. But is tough to go into a class room for a period and judge if a teacher is doing a good job. Of course they will be the boss is watching.

 

For me I say install camera's in every class room and record what is going on.

 

1. Use it to help young teachers on areas of improvement.

 

2. Use it to fire the ones not teaching.

What if they teach well everyday and the kids still don't perform well on standardized assessments?

I like the Ohio program where a kid has to pass a standarized test that covers the basics that a HS student should know leaving high school. They have to have it passed and passing grades in their senior level credits to receive a diploma.

 

Responsibility goes directly on the kid and parents.

 

But to hold schools responsible, there should be level that must be met that is acceptable that kids from their school are passing the test.

 

I would have a problem with almost a test every year to show their improvement in the basics that they are learning. Fail that test too bad and you are kept back that grade level.

 

Concerning Ace's point, you don't make the test to trick the student. You put addition, subtraction, reading, basic geometry and the like. You show them what they need to know.

 

That is how I taught. I told them what would be on the test. It was not a game for them to figure out what I wanted them to know. It was a vehicle for me to determine if they did learn exactly what I wanted them to learn.

 

I did not give them the questions and they just had to remember the letter number. But gave them the 4 components of a printed ad and said, "You will have to know what these four things are on the test." Better know it.

One problem that you have also in high schools is when you overemphasize tests and the programs that are great for kids but don't help out directly on the tests take a back seat.

 

Band programs. Choruses, NJROTC, athletic programs, DECA, FBLA, FCCLA, etc, etc.

 

These are great programs that kids need to be involved in and because of the overemphasizing of standardized tests to monitor school's effectiveness, they are pushed into the corner like Baby in Dirty Dancing.

What if they teach well everyday and the kids still don't perform well on standardized assessments?

 

give them a raise. If they are doing what is required by law. Teachers only have kids 6-7 hours a day. Sometimes the parents and community have to help.

I read an opinion piece recently about education and one point that jumped out to me that I fully agree with is that the ability to be an effective teacher is innate.

I read an opinion piece recently about education and one point that jumped out to me that I fully agree with is that the ability to be an effective teacher is innate.

 

I think I disagree with that in some ways.

 

I feel I am 1000 degree better teacher today than I was my first year.

I think I disagree with that in some ways.

 

I feel I am 1000 degree better teacher today than I was my first year.

 

My answer to your post is not a reflection upon you as a teacher since I have no clue how well you teach.

 

The problem I have with your answer is that it still doesn't mean you have an innate ability to teach. You've given a "relative measure" instead of an absolute. I may have been really, really bad 5 years ago. I've now improved to just being "bad." That doesn't tell me I was born to teach.

 

Again, no reflection upon your abilities(although I don't know what "1000 degrees" means).

My answer to your post is not a reflection upon you as a teacher since I have no clue how well you teach.

 

The problem I have with your answer is that it still doesn't mean you have an innate ability to teach. You've given a "relative measure" instead of an absolute. I may have been really, really bad 5 years ago. I've now improved to just being "bad." That doesn't tell me I was born to teach.

 

Again, no reflection upon your abilities(although I don't know what "1000 degrees" means).

 

Might have been the two vicadins and three muscle relaxers I had to take to get through this back pain I have been fighting the past two weeks.:D

 

I searched my memory for some analogy that meant a lot and that popped into mind. Not sure what it means but it sounded like a lot.

My answer to your post is not a reflection upon you as a teacher since I have no clue how well you teach.

 

The problem I have with your answer is that it still doesn't mean you have an innate ability to teach. You've given a "relative measure" instead of an absolute. I may have been really, really bad 5 years ago. I've now improved to just being "bad." That doesn't tell me I was born to teach.

 

Again, no reflection upon your abilities(although I don't know what "1000 degrees" means).

 

People say that teaching is a calling, a ministry and I would agree with you and them on that.

 

It is not just a job for us but something we WANT to do to help out the youth.

give them a raise. If they are doing what is required by law. Teachers only have kids 6-7 hours a day. Sometimes the parents and community have to help.

 

But if you evaluate them on student performance, they could be doing an outstanding job and the students are so far behind that they still don't perform well and then, like Rhode Island, you fire them. Teachers do not make students drop out, yet they do.

I'm going to throw this out for discussion. I've been a science teacher for 10 years now. I've taught in very large urban schools (Valley Traditional in Louisville), very large rural schools (Mercer Co), and currenly very small school (Burgin Independent). In 10 years of teaching the biggest problem facing student learning is class size!!! When I taught at Valley and Mercer my class size averaged 30+ per class. At Burgin my my chemistry class has 12 students. My physics class has 10 students. My freshman level integrated science classes are the largest at 20 and 21 students. I can accomplish soooooo much more in class and I can provide more individual instruction at Burgin because I have fewer students.

 

To go a step further because of our small size the superintendent attends atleast one of my classes per week. The principal pops in and observes my classes atleast once a week. They do this to every teacher, not to put pressure on us, but to ensure that we are doing what we are supposed to be doing. When I was at Mercer and Valley, I never once saw the superintendent. At Burgin he eats lunch with the students everyday.

 

Point I'm making here is that while smaller schools are not possible, the larger schools need to double the teaching staff. I would bet the farm that if schools had class sizes of 15 or less, student acheivement would dramtically increase.

 

I dont know, I may have just made an arguement for charter schools????

I'm going to throw this out for discussion. I've been a science teacher for 10 years now. I've taught in very large urban schools (Valley Traditional in Louisville), very large rural schools (Mercer Co), and currenly very small school (Burgin Independent). In 10 years of teaching the biggest problem facing student learning is class size!!! When I taught at Valley and Mercer my class size averaged 30+ per class. At Burgin my my chemistry class has 12 students. My physics class has 10 students. My freshman level integrated science classes are the largest at 20 and 21 students. I can accomplish soooooo much more in class and I can provide more individual instruction at Burgin because I have fewer students.

 

To go a step further because of our small size the superintendent attends atleast one of my classes per week. The principal pops in and observes my classes atleast once a week. They do this to every teacher, not to put pressure on us, but to ensure that we are doing what we are supposed to be doing. When I was at Mercer and Valley, I never once saw the superintendent. At Burgin he eats lunch with the students everyday.

 

Point I'm making here is that while smaller schools are not possible, the larger schools need to double the teaching staff. I would bet the farm that if schools had class sizes of 15 or less, student acheivement would dramtically increase.

 

I dont know, I may have just made an arguement for charter schools????

 

I know rockmom and I have been all over that idea for some time. Smaller class sizes not necessarily smaller schools. :thumb:

 

Trinity has about 1400-1500 students and the student-teacher ratio is still pretty low. That is one of the biggest reasons for the successes we have had. On top of the fact that we are a private institution with tons of parental involvement.