Rhee fires 241 D.C. teachers; 165 cited for poor performance

[BabylonHoruv]

My mom worked in the school system for decades, as an administrative assistant not as a teacher.  I don't know how applicable the things she has told me are, since the place she worked is a small, well funded school.  However she chose to put my younger brother into private school because she was sick of the administration.  She never had anything bad to say about a teacher, although the teacher I had for 7th grade really was completely senile, there is no way she should have been teaching any longer.  There were some outstandingly good teachers there in my experience, some that were not bad, and that one that was too old to teach.  What gave my mother constant headaches though was the administration.  The restraints that they put on the teachers were frustrating both for them and for the students, and because she handled the budget she could see how poorly it was allocated.

[Cain]

Uh, believe me, no-one in the US teaches for the wonderful pay and opportunities the job presents.  In fact, since teachers are required to be graduates, they'd probably earn more in the private sector anyway.

Average teacher Salary in DC is 66k a year.  Average Salary in the US for a college grad is 42k.

Edit, found average college grad-DC pay, which is 72k, I suspect that is distorted by government contractor and lobbyist jobs unique to the area.

The listed pay for teachers are for if they worked the full year, it is not what they are actually taking in.  Teachers in areas such as California are not only taking pay cuts currently, but are not being paid for any time they spend outside of a classroom, including doing school trips, after school activities and prep work, as well as lunch breaks and time spent between classes or in free periods.  In some cases, their actual pay is working out to be $10/hour or so.

[Cain]

The question isn't whether there are bad teachers, it is whether a new system which magically finds 20% of the sample of teachers unfit (and has what seems to be several real flaws in its execution) is really working as advertised, or is in fact being used as a soft method to cover up methodical and sweeping layoffs, and what effect this is likely to have on education in the area.

It isn't magic, it's just being enforced for the first time.

Did you even read the criticisms of the new system in the article?  Or did you just read the first two paragraphs and cement into an opinion?  It's a brand new system where teachers aren't being given the criterea on which they are being judged and not being given support when they are reviewed poorly in certain areas.  Gosh, I wonder how that could turn out badly?

[Requia ☣]

California is not DC.  It's true that some places in America teachers are vastly underpaid, and California is certainly one of them, but that's not true for all of America.

The low hourly wage when you consider the unpaid overtime is also pretty typical for salaried employees here.

[Requia ☣]

The people staying behind are apparently winning big too.

The average base salary will jump from $67,000 this year to more than $81,000 in 2012. Depending how well their students perform, teachers in the merit-pay program could earn up to $150,000, which would make them some of the highest-compensated urban teachers in the nation.

[Cain]

I also notice everyone skirting around the point that even mediocre or bad teachers (except in the worst cases) still have a role to play in schools because, as I pointed out, an understaffed school is actually going to perform worse than a fully staffed one unless every single teacher there is of mediocre or worse skill (statistically unlikely).  5-10% getting axed seems far more justifiable, especially if the layoffs were spread out as so to minimize the disruption to the educational system and they were actively seeking to fill the vacant posts.  Again though, that don't seem to be the case here, based on the available evidence.

You can argue generally about zomg teh bad teachers until the cows come home, but let's try looking at the facts of the particular case, shall we?

A bad teacher can do far more harm than good, even as a place holder.

Thank you for that assertion without evidence or argument.  Ever worked an understaffed school?  Teachers are more stressed, classes are larger and you have to rely on supply teachers, who the kids don't respect or listen to and have absolutely no clout.  It's a recipe for disaster which is far worse than a teacher who doesn't know the material as well as they should, isn't motivated enough or treats the kids in a too harsh fashion.  At least they'll get some classes where the teacher is motivated enough to look out for their needs and isn't too stressed and overworked to have the time.

[Cain]

For American schools, I'd add not penalizing teachers for stupid administers (like NCLB does) to Placid Dingo's list.

I haven't heard a single good thing about NCLB from the teachers here.  Even mentioning it causes scowls and quiet curses.

[Placid Dingo]

For American schools, I'd add not penalizing teachers for stupid administers (like NCLB does) to Placid Dingo's list.

Sorry, could someone please attach an Australian friendly translation?

[Cain]

For American schools, I'd add not penalizing teachers for stupid administers (like NCLB does) to Placid Dingo's list.

Sorry, could someone please attach an Australian friendly translation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act

This should help

[AFK]

For American schools, I'd add not penalizing teachers for stupid administers (like NCLB does) to Placid Dingo's list.

I haven't heard a single good thing about NCLB from the teachers here.  Even mentioning it causes scowls and quiet curses.

Most of the teachers and administrators I work with say the same.  And that's part of the problem.  The whole "teach to the test" idea which is limiting for some students.  I think it is about time NCLB is either scrapped, or paired with a parallel initiative that normalizes and institutionalizes alternative education modalities.  If a kid does better with experience-based learning, that should be an option and the determinent of success for that kid shouldn't be determined by the NCLB standardized testing.  There is so much information out about kids who simply don't do well with tests.  The education system needs to do a better job of weaving those ideas into public school curricula. 

Of course, another tough piece is economics.  I work in two of the largest school districts in the state, one of which is the poorest district in the state and has the largest dropout rate.  Now, that school district is stocked with good people.  Great teachers, great guidance counselors, and the superintendent is top notch.  But they just can't overcome the economics and how crushing that is on a child.  If a child is born in a family that has this culture that their futures are predetermined to be fail.  There will never be any motivation there to learn no matter how good the teacher is.  I would wager this is an element at play in many of the DC neighborhoods. 

[Adios]

The question isn't whether there are bad teachers, it is whether a new system which magically finds 20% of the sample of teachers unfit (and has what seems to be several real flaws in its execution) is really working as advertised, or is in fact being used as a soft method to cover up methodical and sweeping layoffs, and what effect this is likely to have on education in the area.

It isn't magic, it's just being enforced for the first time.

Did you even read the criticisms of the new system in the article?  Or did you just read the first two paragraphs and cement into an opinion?  It's a brand new system where teachers aren't being given the criterea on which they are being judged and not being given support when they are reviewed poorly in certain areas.  Gosh, I wonder how that could turn out badly?

So how can the effectiveness of a teacher be fairly measured? FTR I think 'teaching to the test' is a horrible thing and should be abandoned.

[Jasper]

You're right.  And it wouldn't be done if it didn't cost so much less.  What schools need is, unfortunately, a lot more funding.  School budgets have been getting the axe for too long without reprieve, and at this point there is no other solution that ends in better education.

[Hoser McRhizzy]

The people staying behind are apparently winning big too.

Last month, union members and the D.C. Council approved a new contract that raises educators' salaries by 21.6 percent but diminishes traditional seniority protections in favor of personnel decisions based on results in the classroom. The pact also provides for a "performance pay" system with bonuses of $20,000 to $30,000 annually for teachers who meet certain benchmarks, including growth in test scores.

Teachers being bullied into working for bonuses premised on standardized testing.  What could go wrong?
....................................

The whole thing's a perfect example of what happens when business administration takes over education.  They'll always get funding for more standardization and untested teacher evaluation systems, but money for books, computers and software, afterschool programs, teacher training, support staff, building repairs and so on is off the table.

I'd like to see an area breakdown of the layoffs.  If it's the same as here, already underfunded schools are usually the ones that take the hardest knocks from this kind of shit.

Got to say, the scale of this is sickening.  And whatever DC pulls off in terms of policing schools, our local boards try to push through (usually about 5 years later).  Very scary stuff.  What Sigmatic said: This is dicks.

[Juana]

Uh, believe me, no-one in the US teaches for the wonderful pay and opportunities the job presents.  In fact, since teachers are required to be graduates, they'd probably earn more in the private sector anyway.

Average teacher Salary in DC is 66k a year.  Average Salary in the US for a college grad is 42k.

Edit, found average college grad-DC pay, which is 72k, I suspect that is distorted by government contractor and lobbyist jobs unique to the area.

That's ignoring the cost of living - DC is fucking expensive. Teachers who've been doing it a long time to well enough in pretty much any district - my mom's been teaching for twelve years now and makes ~$65k a year, I think, and we have the lowest cost of living in the state here. However, that's contingent on having a union. Teachers in districts without a union are vulnerable to a lot of shit, larger paycuts being one of them.

The listed pay for teachers are for if they worked the full year, it is not what they are actually taking in.  Teachers in areas such as California are not only taking pay cuts currently, but are not being paid for any time they spend outside of a classroom, including doing school trips, after school activities and prep work, as well as lunch breaks and time spent between classes or in free periods.  In some cases, their actual pay is working out to be $10/hour or so.

They've never been paid for prep time or any of the other stuff. Paycuts, yeah, those they're taking now. But that's generally a very small one - 1% pay cut in my mom's district this year. A tiny bit less for each teacher saves the district a lot of money.

The people staying behind are apparently winning big too.

Last month, union members and the D.C. Council approved a new contract that raises educators' salaries by 21.6 percent but diminishes traditional seniority protections in favor of personnel decisions based on results in the classroom. The pact also provides for a "performance pay" system with bonuses of $20,000 to $30,000 annually for teachers who meet certain benchmarks, including growth in test scores.

Teachers being bullied into working for bonuses premised on standardized testing.  What could go wrong?

The concern I have here is less about bullying and more about teachers cheating. It's not hard to do, frankly, even though these days when the kids are done with a test, they're given a sticker to seal the book shut. Care and a little bit of tacky glue can cover that up.

The whole thing's a perfect example of what happens when business administration takes over education.  They'll always get funding for more standardization and untested teacher evaluation systems, but money for books, computers and software, afterschool programs, teacher training, support staff, building repairs and so on is off the table.

This is correct. The books the poorer district is using are pretty much ancient, except for their English and math books, because that's what they're tested on most. My mom's kids' history books are from about 2002, if that.

I'd like to see an area breakdown of the layoffs.  If it's the same as here, already underfunded schools are usually the ones that take the hardest knocks from this kind of shit.

Yep. My old high school is the poorest in the district and taking almost all the losses. It's also the one falling apart. I'd also add that it's the regular teachers that will be the ones leaving - not the AP, honors, or any of the other fancy teachers like that. The regular ones for the majority of the student body and the special ed teachers are going to be the ones to go.

_{Edited for quote fail}

[Jasper]

Well, there's the part about not working during the summer.  My aunt lives pretty minimally so she can vacation during the summer, and that's just enough to keep her sane.