Man Stops Traffic at 17th and K to Demand $200 Million
Morning Roundup: Goodbye, Abe Edition
Judge Throws Out WTU Suit Over Teacher Layoffs
Vegetate to Close at the End of the Month
Morning Roundup: Rain Won't Go Away Edition
District schools czar Michelle Rhee just released a detailed list of what it means to be a good teacher. Schools are quite different on whatever planet Rhee comes from! Here are a few of the qualities that Rhee says good teachers will exhibit every half hour, according to the Washington Post:
- No more than five instances of "off-task behavior" by students
- Teachers will pose three "probing" interrogatives in response to correct answers
- No more than three minutes of time lost to disorganization
- Students will advance grades every 15 minutes
- One-hundred percent class attendance rate
- Negative ten percent tardiness rate
- Teachers will pass the Kobayashi Maru
Rhee's 200-some-odd-page "DCPS Teaching and Learning Framework" sounds like the sort of thing that gets delivered on Mount Sinai: a document that doesn't merely clarify the aspects of the job that need clarifying but instead signals a shift in the company's direction. More than just a shift: a wholly new initiative. On the heels of a major restructuring that included massive school consolidation and personnel turnover -- which is to say nothing of the stalled negotiations with the teachers' unions -- Rhee announces an effort to quantify and mandate the experience inside the classroom. I believe the word is "micromanaging."
No doubt, Rhee's supporters -- or alternatively, DCPS's critics -- will call it "bitter medicine," the ultimate stage in a top-down revolution to transform a system that had few virtues. And parts of Rhee's classroom-oversight program certainly sound good. As the Washington Post reports:
Teachers will be subject to revamped evaluations based in part on the new teaching and learning framework, which will deploy a corps of "master teachers" to join principals in assessing instructors. The changes are an attempt to make performance reviews more objective and less vulnerable to school politics or personal issues. The new evaluations also are expected to include improvement in student test scores as part of the criteria by which some instructors will be judged.To my mind, these sound like features that could make for real improvements -- if they are changes teachers have asked for. Do teachers believe that the problem with schools is internal politics? Because if they don't, a "master teachers" corps may not be received enthusiastically by the "mastered teachers." Meet the new boss. . . .
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
So long as teachers and administrators don't require reformed parents in order to deliver results. 'Cause that relies on factors out of most anyone's control.
DCPS needs to focus on controlling what it can.
The spirit of these is somewhere between reductionist and ridiculous. It also begs the question, if this is really a system-wide good idea, then where are the parallel and equally ludicrous metrics for Rhea?
She might be good at getting a lot of (at times incredibly unproductive) media attention, but she really seems to have flopped at getting the job done.
The District school system is a joke because these 'rules' were dismissed in the past by those who cared no more than to get the kids through the system.
Ms. Rhee is trying; others in the past I am not so sure of. As long as the district failed to take education seriously, students were happy to match that attitude. While you seem to make light of her goals Kriston, the country can't succeed if education is not taken seriously.
I applaud her efforts at trying to apply discipline to the education process. Least we forget, this may be the only shot we get at molding minds to face the workplace of tomorrow.
I agree with much of Rhea's agenda, I just think her track record at successfully advancing that agenda is flop-tastic.
I'm also a fan of clear performance metrics and good evaluation and assessment programs. But, and it's an enormous but, when they aren't also similarly applied to an organization's leadership and management, it's not really about improving quality, it's about another lever of power and control.
Also, as metrics go, Rhea's really are painfully reductionist. I think a great homework assignment for Rhea would be to go watch Barry Schwartz's TED talk on "the loss of wisdom" and mull it over for a while: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/barry_schwartz_on_our_loss_of_wisdom.html
Jakers, what do you know about it?
What do you know about it really?
When my kids had a teacher who believed and told me to my face that the pronunciation "axe" for the work "ask" was acceptable in English then you tell me how "reductionist" metrics are a problem?
When a teacher came to school with a hangover and told the parents he had a hangover, how are reductionist metrics the problem?
when a teacher missed 5 days of school due to her cousin's death how are reductionist metrics the problem?
When a teacher couldn't or refused to tell the parents what college she went to, how are reductionist metrics the problem?
When a teacher told me that they refused to lead the kids in the pledge of allegiance in class because "America has done nothing for the black community" despite that:
1. I'm not black and neither are most of the students in the class
2. Obama was 2 months away from getting elected president
Then you tell me if reductionist metrics are the problem.
When a 15 year veteran teacher is discovered to have faked credentials after violently reacting to 5 year olds in class and has to be replaced by December, then you tell me if reductionist metrics are the problem.
When a teacher's boyfriend gets arrested for a rumored-to-be-drug-related shooting incident in Capitol Heights, you tell me if reductionist metrics are the problem.
When a teacher regularly shows up to class after the 8:40 bell rings to let kids into the class and the classroom is totally unprepared for the kids 3 out of 5 days then you tell me if reductionist metrics are the problem.
Ninling, none of examples you mention dispute what I wrote. I whole-heartedly support the need to radically reform DC's school system. Moreover, I agree with many of Rhee's objectives. But so far she's had a terrible track record of actually getting them accomplished, and there's a real irony seeing someone who toots the horn of measurable outcomes producing so few measurable outcomes themselves.
What do I know about it personally? Well, I'm a university prof., and I've added Rhee's negotiations with the teacher's union as a case study (primarily as rich source of examples of what not to do) in a graduate-level negotiations course I teach.
What do I know about it personally? Well, I'm a university prof., and I've added Rhee's negotiations with the teacher's union as a case study (primarily as rich source of examples of what not to do) in a graduate-level negotiations course I teach.
Waiting for Woody Allen to step out from behind the curtain with Marshall McLuhan in 3...2...1...
Waiting for Woody Allen to step out from behind the curtain with Marshall McLuhan in 3...2...1...
Look at you with the Annie Hall reference.
DCPS teachers fail to teach in Ward 1 and the Ward 1 parents are mostly better educated in better schools and have better jobs and bought million dollar Mt Pleasant houses and $400k condos. Yet in Ward 1 the teachers still complain that it's the parent's fault because they don't value education.
Why is it that all the Ward 7 and 8 parents who come to our school out of boundary are always wonderful parents, if stuck in poverty?
The problem is that the drugged out teenagers you used to run into at Celebrity Hall seeing Little Benny and the Masters who left the two kids they had home with Grandma are DCPS teachers today.
Other sites report that this is a document that many teachers in the city have asked for.
Can't see anything wrong with it.
Good for Rhee.
Before anyone can impart wisdom, there needs to be basic order and respect.
DC high schoolers and teachers have told me stories of teachers reading magazines during class periods, showing movies for an hour (not educational films, regular movies) and basically abandoning all pretense of actually teaching.
If it takes "micromanagement" to get these scam artists-with-seniority out of the system, so be it. Real teachers should welcome the firing of those who give the profession a bad rap.
The sarcastic overexaggerated tone of this 'report' only serves to sully the reputation of DCist. Most readers are aware of DCists sordid history with Rhee, but it is tiresome and annoying to be continually dragged into the melee when one only wants to read the headlines.
On top of that, there is a distinct lack of facts present. It wouldn't take much investigating to learn that the teachers did in fact request this. Nor does the release of these performance criteria indicate that no other performance criteria have been developed for administrative professionals.
Setting all that aside, I think these basic performance measurements are necessary even if the teachers didn't ask for them. Our school system is a disaster and it is obvious from all the stunted attempts at reform and to get rid of incompetent teachers that clear and basic performance criteria need to be established. Simply meeting test score standares, getting positive student or parent feedback, or completing CEUs is not enough to evaluate a competent teacher. And of course, no one is forcing teachers to stay. They are welcome to go to another district or work at a private or charter school if they don't like DCPS rules. Of course, the rules at those places will probably be even stricter.
charlielegal, why don't you go ahead then and set the record straight. Enlighten us with the comparable performance benchmarks and vigorous monitoring and evaluation that Rhee and other administrators will be following.
(p.s. It's not omitted in dcist's reporting; it doesn't exist.)
really? you know with absolute certainty that such performance criteria don't exist?
Yes, I'm confident that's the case. There are not comparable explicit evaluation metrics for Rhee, nor a similar system of rigorous evaluation and assessment being conducted on her performance.
If there was a true belief in transparency, accountability, and a deep commitment to improving and learning within the DC public school system/organization, then what's good for the goose ought be good for the gander. Otherwise, this looks less like a meaningful change, and more like a hypocritical use of evaluation as just another way of adding a layer of bureaucratic power and control.
If you're seriously curious about how evaluation and assessment can be used to make positive significant change--and also how it can get distorted into a one-sided grab for power and control--I'd suggest getting involved in the American Evaluation Association (http://www.eval.org).
Yes, I'm confident that's the case. There are not comparable explicit evaluation metrics for Rhee, nor a similar system of rigorous evaluation and assessment being conducted on her performance.
Yes, it's just like with this Obama character. How dare he impose any governmental reforms when he himself hasn't worked up an extensive contract of evaluation and assessment metrics.
If you're "seriously curious about how evaluation and assessment can be used to make positive significant change"--at least in the context of big city public school systems--I suggest you read this New Yorker article:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_brill
Dang ibc, you're right, instead of turning to a professional association focused on evaluation and assessment work (much of it education research), I should turn to an article New Yorker for a richer understanding.
Look at the argument...
1. Accountability via clear metrics/outcomes and well done regular assessment and evaluation helps the organization learn and improve. Among other things, it identifies people who are flopping at their job so they can either improve or get culled out of the system.
2. But, umm, we're only going to apply that to the lowest level of employees in the organization. Because, well, ... (silence).
I happen to agree with 1. There's really even a huge debate about that, as high stakes assessment (i.e. the results of this assessment is going to affect pay or job retention), have mixed results because of all the ridiculous incentives for gaming the assessment.
But why 2? The lopsided application of evaluation and assessment only makes sense if you really think that the sole or primary problem here is the teachers. Have you had any experience with administrators in the DC public school system? (Heck, the administrators in any large organization?) There's drek at every level, and it's just as imaginable that it's not just an issue of bad teachers, but also good teachers being prevented from doing a good job by inept and terrible administrators.
This kind of lopsided application of assessment isn't an attempt to move the system to assessment and accountability. It's a move to give people higher-up in the bureaucracy more power over frontline worker. Moreover, half-measures like this don't work well in systems. Giving a car better tires and a faster engine doesn't help when there's a poor driver--in fact, it could easily make things worse. Likewise, giving administrators more power, when there's no checks to see if they are capable themselves, hardly seems promising in the long-term.
The central office had a pretty big cleaning last year, and tons of reorg. My sense is that, for better or worse, Rhee is subject to the court of public opinion far more than any metric you could dream up, not that you've put any out there.
As a former teacher in a rough system, I feel that these standards are ambitious yet fair.
Somegirl's stories of magazine reading during class and showing non-educational movies reference fairly common teacher behavior in many schools.
I doubt anyone would ever get reprimanded for something truly out of his or her control or for a slip up here or there -- because most of the observers will know what it's like to be in a similar classroom or will have an opportunity to observe incidents in context. However, the theme here is that teachers have to take ownership over the classroom experience, and that is a good thing that often goes by the wayside with struggling, burned out, and/or apathetic teachers.
These also do something good for teachers -- they don't focus on standardized test results which we all know are affected by a host of out of classroom factors. With these, teachers will have the opportunity to show that they are doing their part.
Very few of these items can really be called "micromanaging" -- is it micromanaging to say don't lose time to disorganization? Unless there are additional materials that should have been included here, it doesn't look like Rhee is telling the teachers how to organize their students' activity folders.
It seems a little wrong to beg for the freedom to allow your students to have more than five instances of "off task behavior," doesn't it?
Evaluated only based on what we know here, these standards still allow for a signficant amount of valid teacher autonomy.
So, Kriston, I assume you've got a better plan for trying to improve the unbelievably bad DC school systems?
Or is snark all you've got to contribute?
Give the woman a break. By most accounts she's making more progress than nearly anyone else has. This, at a time with charter schools are taking most of the brighter kids out of the system.
This DCist article was a disappointment. And a bit childish.
Kriston's hipster snark = EPIC FAIL.
Here's my two cents:
A few years back a friend of mine was hired as a contractor to conduct a survey of D.C. elementary school children and their parents in the lower-income section of the city. The teachers were given instructions to fill out a form with the student's name and a few other items. I helped input the data into a spreadsheet program.
Good God. How these teachers even got out of 6th grade is beyond me. Over ninety-percent of the forms were incomplete and most were filled out incorrectly.
I hope Rhee can weed out the bad apples and provide our children with the tools and teachers that they need to survive in this world.
Pet peeve: She's not the "schools czar" she's the "Chancellor of District of Columbia Public Schools" or simply the "Chancellor". There's no need to stick a f*cking "czar" on her name when she has a regular job with the city which comes with a normal, recognizable title.
As long as people don't think back to their own favorite teachers and expect that teachers of that same quality are teaching in DCPS then I'm ok with some of this commentary.
I talked to a bunch of parents over the weekend and we were all feeling pretty good after school beautification day except one parent whose kid's new teacher had unpacked boxes still in the room on Saturday. If you haven't set up the room after a week then that doesn't sound too promising.
So while a LOT of teachers have gotten the message there are still recalcitrants who think the status quo is ok.
Agree with many of these who find this post unreasonable. I don't want the schools to be perfect, I want them improved. Performance measures are a way to reflect improvement (and, yes, they are imperfect). The city cannot improve the homes or the parents, but it has shown that it's willing to stare down a union-full of historically very poor performers, both in the classroom and behind-the-scenes. Go Rhee. (Did we ever have a superintendent who has accomplished what this chancellor has?) To my mind, quanitfying and mandating to not add up to micromanagement. Very snarky.
*...do not add up to. sry.
I talked to a bunch of parents over the weekend and we were all feeling pretty good after school beautification day except one parent whose kid's new teacher had unpacked boxes still in the room on Saturday. If you haven't set up the room after a week then that doesn't sound too promising.
Swiss Family Rat attended the school beautification at BabyRat's new school over the weekend and had a chance to see her classroom that didn't seem to be quite ready for prime time and looked about the same during drop off this morning. WifeRat and I are still trying to figure out if we're just a couple of high-strung yuppies who are expecting too much or if we're already heading down the slippery slope to lowered expectations. I suspect that it's a little from column A and a little from column B.
@jakers
You seem to have something constructive to add to the conversation, and your point about applying standards and performance metrics to all levels of an organization lest they be simply used as a power grab by those at the top makes sense to me. However, don't we need to give those in charge the power and control to implement their vision before we can properly evaluate them?
Sorry Rat.
Good luck, but if the teacher screws up badly, start talking to the principal and PTA RIGHT AWAY and if things go really downhill, then email the Chancellor's office and the mayor.
If you paid over $400k for your house then you can expect Montgomery County quality education. period.
Kristin, please check out yesterday's NYT column from the public editor, who asked, basically, "What is the difference between edgy and objectionable?"
Because from reading your posts, it appears you're confusing the two.
Ninling,
I am a teacher and was in my room all weekend getting it ready for today. Many of us did not get the usual amount of time to be in our rooms thanks to must-attend meetings where teachers had to go be introduced to the new Teaching Framework. The meetings this week took up most of the time that we could have been in our rooms forcing most of us to work into the evening and on weekends. The much touted Teaching Framework, by the way, is nothing but a whole lot of stuff we have been put through every year. Those that get it get it those that don't (or don't care) don't. I'd have rather had the time in my room.
I disagree. This is not "a whole lot of stuff" you get "put through" every year. The new rubrics are far more objective and specific than they have ever been. (And please don't describe being evaluated as something you're "put through," like it's an ordeal you endure to appease those who'd like to see if you're doing your job.)
Imagine another scenario: no training was given. You were handed a binder and sent off to your rooms. One less-than-stellar evaluation and everyone would be crying, "DCPS doesn't support us! Waah! WTU save me, they didn't tell me I'd be held to new standards! Where's George Parker?!?"
(Speaking of doing a much better job: stick with the things you're good at, Kriston, like interviews about Science!, and leave the snark to the pros.)