Of course you know that I am a big supporter of getting rid of Teacher tenure. So I am ecstatic that this bill has been passed and is heading for the Governor. Now we will have to see what he does with it.
And yes I am very aware that there are some bad bosses / Principals out there that may use this to reduce their expenses. (ie fire the expensive Teachers) However, the Union loving folks have to remember that this is how it is in the real world. That is why people over 40 yrs old have the right to sue employers for wrongful termination and age discrimination. This option does a pretty good job of keeping employers honest.
The reality is that it usually takes intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to get the most out of even the best employees. And this usually involves carrots and potential sticks. Without the option of dismissal, I am not sure how a Principal could ever provide enough pressure to entice a burned out Teacher back to giving 100%. And don't the students and tax payers deserve 100%.
Enter "Teacher" into the search space off to the right if you want to see dozens of postings where we have discussed evaluation methods, compensation and many other related topics. Thoughts?
MNPublius Why Talking about Laying Off Teachers?
KARE11 Teacher Tenure Debate
FOX News: MN Senate passes Bill
Forest Lake: Teacher Effectiveness
Ed MN: Dooher criticizes Senate
MPR MN Teachers weigh in
Pioneer Post: Dayton hints at Veto
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
John,
I have read your posts, I have heard your comments. It appears that you have plenty of time to be an arm chair quarterback. The reality is much of what you are saying is inaccurate and or fantasy (you do not have the background or experiences to know)
Why not keep your opinion to your own line of work. I know there are plenty of problems with employees in your own field. I am too busy with my own job to bother with yours.
I know your type. How about climate change. Even though climate is not your field I bet you have decided human induced climate change is fantasy. Why not go after the scientists for that.
Clayton
We discuss all kind of topics here at G2A that we know little about. That is the idea of the site. And you are correct that I know little about the specifics of in-school politics. However I do know a lot about Management, Supervision, Performance Mgmt, etc.
Please help us understand how teachers and schools are so different from the rest of us. Enough so that they do not need perf plans, reviews and consequences.
I always find it odd that those who grade all day have an intense dislike for the concept of being graded and held accountable. As for global warming, I don't have enough knowledge to have an opinion either way.
And yes I am serious. If my posts and the resulting comments are incorrect, please enlighten us. That is why I chose the blog format.
However at the same time, I hope you are willing to question things that you hold as sacred beliefs. That is the other reason I make time for this blog. My goal is improving self awareness, not convincing anyone... I respect my beliefs and yours, even if they are different.
One last point I had forgotten. Unfortunately as a tax payer and a parent, your business is our business. Health services and Education are the largest portions of the state taxes we pay, therefore they are 2 of our most popular topics. People seem to want to ensure their money is being spent effectively.
Besides everyone cares for kids...
I believe the proposed law weakens techer tenure but does not eliminate it, which is a good thing. The comment which I found astoundingly ignorant for a blogger with a science background was this one:
As for global warming, I don't have enough knowledge to have an opinion either way."
Really? I saw in a recent poll that 2/3 of adults now accept reality of climate change. Did you know that 10 of 11 of the warmest winters on record have happened since 2000?
Laurie,
I understand how tenure is a good thing for the ~70,000 Teachers. Now explain to us how it is a good thing for the 5,300,000 other Minnesotans. Especially our kids... I am missing this rationale.
Anybody have a reason why tenure is good for the 5,300,000 Minnesotans and our children?
"I believe the proposed law weakens techer tenure but does not eliminate it, which is a good thing." – Laurie
Heh. Sometimes I do not read carefully and it leads me to not understanding what someone else is saying. More often, though, my first read through something is a lot more interesting and even more truthful. Here, for example, I read that there was a law weakening "lecher tenure" and I had to agree that we shouldn't be keeping lechers on staff, especially in our schools! The whole notion of tenure makes a bit of sense at the university level, freeing professors to pursue research and writing as they wish without being second-guessed by administrators. In the K-12 world, however, I see no such justification. Teachers who are not performing their primary duties of classroom instruction at a level commensurate with expectations should be terminated after sufficient time has been given to bring their performance up. If tenure protects these teachers for a year or two while they improve performance, it's a good thing but perhaps should be called something different. It should not be an excuse to keep the bad teacher for any longer than that because of the terrible effects it has on the children, especially in the elementary grades. it is good for all of us if teachers improve, while avoiding having to hire and train a new one.
So, tentatively, I agree with Laurie on this one.
J. Ewing
That's not called tenure... That is called Performance Mgmt and is practiced by every company I have studied or worked at. Performance problem is identified and documented, improvement plan is created and documented, employee improves or employee is terminated. They do this because it is the right thing to do, and it reduces the liklihood of losing a lawsuit.
Based on my talks with Teachers, sometimes I think some believe they are Professors who need a lot of latitude regarding what they are going to teach and when. Whereas I see the District being responsibly for curriculum, content and timing, and the Teachers being responsible for ensuring the kids learn the chosen content. (ie techniques, organization, interface, etc)
Being a Project Mgr, I work whatever I am assigned by Mgmt. I push back gently at times, however I acknowledge that my job is to faciltate, communicate, document, execute, etc within the scope of the assigned project. I am to ensure the team is working effectively and making progress. Imagine the chaos, and ramifications to my career and the business if I thought I knew better than the Mgmt and set my own agenda for the team?
Thus it seems the Teachers I alude to want to be ensured their right to choose and implement their own curriculum on their own timeline. I am certain there is no evil intent, they just think they know better and feel the std stuff is not adequate.
I also was incorrect earlier when I said "I understand how tenure is a good thing for the ~70,000 Teachers." I think it is only a good thing for the poor or rebellious Teachers. And I assume the rest of the Teachers likely fear that they may be labelled as such sometime.
On the other hand, the majority must realize that they are carrying an extra load due to the poor and rebellious. (ie students get behind) And lord knows a poor performer in the group is a killer on morale... And it definitely is hard on the Professional image.
So I guess I only kind of understand the Pro Tenure argument. Still looking for clarification.
just because teachers are not university professors does not mean they should not be respected as professionals. For example, if you as project manager set a task to "develop user interface," the corporate standards as to naming conventions and programming languages, etc. would all apply, but the "look and feel" would be largely at the discretion of the professional assigned task. So it must be with teachers. The school board (and the state, though to a much lesser degree than currently) sets out the name of the class, probably the textbook to be used, and most likely a syllabus defining the significant learnings to be achieved. The "how" a given teacher arrives at the desired result should be entirely at his/her professional discretion and ability. We WANT teachers to be treated, paid, respected and utilized as true professionals, so that if one of them finds a better way to teach second grade math, every other second grade math teacher can embrace it. It is the only way we are going to get an improved education out of our schools. Everybody knows that you cannot inspect quality into a product, regardless of how high your quality standards are. You have to find a way to build quality into the product at every step. That is where the professionals come in.
I agree there should be performance management, just as you described, but of course that is impossible with tenure in place and even less possible when unions force a single and meaningless standard of performance evaluation –seniority – on school management. The proposed bill reducing tenure and seniority as a consideration is probably a good start
J. Ewing
I agree and have to assume that most principals would see it that way also since they want the kids to learn. Most Principals I have interacted with seem as focused as the Teachers regarding what is good for the students. That is likely why they went into the Education field.
I don't see the Principals I've met as cold hearted business people who are ready to start firing anyone who disagrees with them, or in order to decrease their spend. As usual I may be wrong, and they are actually part time viscious corporate raiders.
The only thing saving public education right now is the fact that most teachers CARE about the kids and see themselves as dedicated professionals. The problem isn't with most of these teachers, but the system in which they find themselves. All of the hidebound rules and regulations and meddling all up the chain of command would make a saint cuss. That's what has to change. Teachers could be paid better if we got rid of some of the meddlers, and could teach better if we got rid of the meddlers.
Anon, Examples of meddling?
Which came first???
meddling due to school problems ... or School problems due to meddling??? (NCLB is only ~10 yrs old, though many regs pre-date it)
By the way, from my limited experience I think ~95% of Teachers are fair to great. It is the ~5% of poor Teachers, and the majority defending them that frustrates me personally. I am thankful though for the 95% !!!
As someone who went through school before most of the "meddling" began, and considering that I read and write the English language properly, can add and subtract with borrowing and carrying and actually do higher math on a routine basis, I think it's clear that the troubles are caused by the meddling. NCLB is almost "positive meddling" in comparison to the mishmosh of state standards, regulations, reporting and testing requirements, social engineering, financial micromanagement and whatnot heaped upon what used to be people concerned just with helping kids learn.
I'm not sure I buy your 95-5% breakdown on teachers, though. I think truly bad teachers-- the ones who should have been fired years ago-- are more like 2%, maybe even less. Of the remaining, I think there are a large number, say 64%, that could and would do better if "the system" got off their backs, offered them some additional incentive and training and tools, and let them just teach. The rest are excellent and I applaud them for doing so in spite of the system they work in.
J. Ewing
I rounded up to ~5%. That is only 5 Teachers in a school of 100 Teachers. I am guessing in some schools it will higher and some it will be lower.
My guess is that it is somewhat of a normal distribution, like most things that have not been effectively sorted for awhile. The next question would be, is addressing the bottom 5th percentile going far enough or too far?
That I do not have the answer to. I guess we can go back to the grading analogy. Th students have to deal with the Teachers / Schools rules, meddling and expectations, and a certain number are unable to meet that expectation. For which there is a negative consequence. It seems a lot like my job...
Parents United Update
John,
I just answered the question you posed in your other post regarding who benefits from teacher tenure. Then I came across this earlier post...
...To compare a classroom of 30 children and a teacher to private-sector employees subject to performance plans, reviews, and consequences, is comparing apples and oranges. I see this in the national debate on the topic all the time. "If it's good for our businesses, it's good for the schools!" Really?
Those of us on the business side (personally I have been in HR in the private sector now for 13 years following 9 years in the federal government), need a reality check about the effectiveness of, and adherence to, performance plans, appraisals, and outcomes, and how they are linked to pay. I can tell you from experience that we are lucky if managers actually complete a performance appraisal on all of their direct reports, let alone actually put thought and meaning into it. We are even luckier if said managers have actually sat down with their employees at the beginning of the performance period and discussed with them what they are going to be rated on. These are all tenants of a good performance management system they are rarely followed. Most appraisals are put together at the last minute in order to comply with "HR's requirements."
When completed, these reviews, which are hit and miss in terms of how good they are and how meaningful they are, are directly linked to pay? Hardly. Most companies establish a pay increase average, say 3% (this has been the average for federal contractors for the last several years). Then, within that 3% average, managers are instructed that they can offer increases based on their employees' value, often the result of a stacked-ranking process which may or may not include the performance rating results as a factor (other factors being their percentile in the compensation program, impact of the employee on the business, and others).
How would this translate to teachers? Not very well, I think. Employees are solely responsible for how successful they are in doing their job, or at least in how hard they try to do their job (and how they interact with others, follow directions, etc). If they don't perform, they can be fired. Teachers' performance is not solely in their control. I'm sure many teachers WISH they could "fire" a student who is not performing, not getting along with others, not paying attention, not following directions, etc. But they can't. They have to live with the problem.
Business employees' computer programs or engineering studies or powerpoint presentations aren't compromised by poor parenting or nonexistent parenting that places a low priority on the work. If the private employee places a low priority on their work, they are fired. If a child goes home to a family situation that makes school a low priority, the child isn't "fired". In fact, the teacher usually ends up working with that child more in an attempt to make up where the parents fail. Who is holding the parents accountable for their performance plan?
And perhaps the biggest difference of all, companies CHOOSE their employees. Potential employees have to interview with the company, and prove to them that they will be an asset to the company, in order for the company to hire them (and vice-versa). Can you imagine what would happen if teachers could do this? Pick only the students who would perform well and make them, and the school, "successful?" It can't, and won't happen. Because a school is not a business, it is a right that our nation has established for all children to be educated. And the success of the school is dependent not just upon the teachers, but on supportive administrators and supportive parents. Holding teachers responsible for all of these factors is nonsensical at best.
Oh come now, I agree that performance mgmt systems are weak in many companies... However to say that "Teachers" are different makes no sense.
You make it sound like us private business folks get to choose our co-workers, suppliers, customers, bosses, etc with free will. And you make it sound like we are not faced with repeated and varying challenges everyday that are outside of our direct control. If this is the case in your profession, you should be very happy.
As for raises, many companies use salary grades, mid points, compa ratios and performance grades to manage raises. If you are below midpoint with an excellent grade, you get a big raise that brings you closer to mid-point. If you have a poor grade and are paid above midpoint, you may get no raise in order to bring you closer to mid-point.
As for what to hold Teachers responsible for? The jury is still out on that, however their Managers are best suited to make that decision. (not the Teachers or the Union) And I can guarantee that "years in the job" and "degrees earned" are terrible criteria for measuring a Teachers effectiveness. Yet that is all we have at this time.
I am sincerely looking to more comments from you. Talk later.
If your performance management system is accomplishing nothing but paperwork, it needs fixing. The one I worked under was excellent, and I had no objection to getting a raise based on my performance against "objectives" agreed to at the first of the year. These objectives were adjusted at least once, and usually twice, during the year based on "obstacles" or changes to objectives that I had no control over. If a significant task was removed, I was given another. Teachers should be no different! It is effort that gets graded, based on the "hand you are dealt." If a key player in your plan quits, etc., you can claim that as the reason for not meeting objective. Same with teachers! Not seeing how such a system could be created and used? Just ask the students, parents and fellow teachers. Everybody, it seems, knows who the "good teachers" are and who the teachers to be avoided are. It can't be that hard if it is obvious.
Besides, teachers went into this line of work to help kids learn. Public schools claim they are experts and can teach everybody-- no exceptions-- and they demand big bucks to do it. We should be rating schools in a way similar to teachers, based on results. Yes, School A may not achieve what school B does for less money, but are the kids being brought up to their full potential, whatever their "handicaps" may be? Does the school have high expectations and methods to achieve them? Are teachers held accountable for such results? It's all one piece, with teachers just one factor, but permitting incompetent teachers to be fired, especially if they cannot or will not improve their performance, is a good first step.
J. Ewing
Post a Comment