HYPOTHETICAL
#1
HYPOTHETICAL
#2
MY
RESPONSE TO HYPOTHETICAL #1
In
the first case, we are delving into the question of what variables affect a child’s
learning outcomes. How much of a role do teachers play, as opposed to other
things such as parenting, the physical plant of the school, or local environment?
And what do I think? It is my contention that the inner city kids will show a
slight increase in their grades, due primarily to a better overall faculty. Further, I believe that the West Windsor kids
may show a slight drop in their grades but in all likelihood their grades will
stay just about the same. Why? Well the
way I see it, parenting and the dynamics of the community one lives in are the
main determinants of a child’s academic success. By parenting by the way I
include such variables as a child’s diet, sleeping and daily habits. If I am
correct the ramifications are significant, because it means that we cannot
improve the success of a child in school without also making changes to the
environment in which the child resides. This is both an expensive and delicate
undertaking, with undertones of race and income lurking on the scene. I do
believe that the quality of teaching in wealthier districts is better than that
delivered in the inner city, and I believe that the support services in the
school are better; this is partially a function of the person doing the
teaching, partially a function of the quality of professional development
provided for teachers in this wealthier schools. It means that parenting is a critical, primary
determinant in a child’s performance in school. Parental expectations are
different, peer pressures are different, the exposure to positive role models
is different, and access to supportive resources is different, all to the
benefit of wealthier children and to the detriment of poor children. All of
these realities combine to limit the positive impact of moving inner city kids
to West Windsor for school. I think that the success of programs like the
Harlem Children’s Zone, for example, in a way confirms my suspicion that these
variables (parenting and community realities) are indeed significant.
There
is one other variable in play that must be mentioned. I believe that kids in
wealthier districts have learned how to advocate for themselves and have a much
greater sense of empowerment when it comes to education and making sure that
the education they are receiving meets their expectations, which are high. I do
not have data to support this, but I have spoken both informally
(extemporaneous conversations) and formally (organized discussions I have run
in the community) with inner city high school kids, and dropouts, and feel
confident in drawing this conclusion.
This
does not bode well for inner city education in the immediate future, but it
does identify the difficult challenges we face in trying to improve learning
outcomes and the performance of our inner city schools.
MY
RESPONSE TO HYPOTHETICAL #2
In
this second case, issues of equity and performance pay are raised. As to the
paycheck, my answer is that their paychecks should not be the same, but not
because one teacher instructs a more rigorous curriculum. Quite frankly, I can
make the point that physical education is as if not more important than a
calculus class, at least for the majority of students not planning a career
requiring proficiency in calculus. I could actually make the case that, under
the right circumstances, that the phys ed teacher should be paid MORE!
Now
the way educators currently receive remuneration, with years of service and
years of personal education as the only two variants, is perhaps the most
asinine way of paying teachers that I can think of. It is the reason why you
see phys ed classes where kids in the springtime seem to do little more than
walk around the track for a half hour to get exercise. The current pay system
provides absolutely no incentive for excellence in teaching, for innovation or
creativity, for performing at the top tail of the curve rather than the middle.
Phys Ed and health teachers have an incredibly important job to play,
especially in this age of childhood obesity, risk taking behavior, and an
overall ignorance of proper health, nutrition, and fitness. The need for “lifelong
learning” in this department is critical for the overall health of our nation.
The
bottom line is that the amount in the paycheck of the math teacher, and the
paycheck of the phys ed teacher, should to a great extent be in the hands of
the teacher, and this is done by instituting a system of performance pay.
I’ve
discussed, and will reintroduce again in a future blog, the fact that metrics
are available that are “teacher friendly” but still rigorous and legitimate
enough to support scrutiny by those that want to hold teachers to a high degree
of accountability. I realize that no system is perfect, but the system in place
now is the worst possible system, especially in the absence of any real program
in place to provide comprehensive clinical supervision of our at risk, non-tenured,
and low achieving teachers. Keep in mind that the majority of teachers in place
today were drawn from the middle to low end of the performance scale in
college. Why would we expect their performance to be any different on the job?
I'm curious to know what you think about these hypotheticals and how you see the scenarios play out. Feel free to share!
No comments:
Post a Comment