School daze continued

Yesterday's Post Outlook section had a nice op-ed by teachers, "Bargaining For Better Teaching," about the lack of a solid professional development system for teachers in DC. Today Jay Mathews wrote in the Post, "For Kids' Sake, Power to Fire Teachers Crucial," about why it's good to be able to get rid of teachers.

What I found troubling about the piece is some uncovered ground:

(1) So the teachers were evaluated and found deficient. (2) is the only response to fire the teachers? (3) or is there an opportunity for assessment, an evaluation of whether or not the teacher can improve to the point demanded by the school and needed for the students to be able to achieve, and (4) if the teacher has potential, where is the development and implementation of a plan for improvement for the teacher.

It's very expensive to hire and fire personnel. And to develop and retain your staff.

I have made presentations to school children over the years, elementary and high school aged kids. It was very hard. And I presume that the children were better behaved because I was a guest. And that it is a lot more difficult to hold their attention for 6 hours/day for 9 months...

In short, while I could probably be a good teacher, I recognize that it would take a couple years to develop me in terms of organization, classroom management, and presentation and delivery skills. It would be a shame and economically wasteful to fire people that have potential but need time, support, coaching, etc., in order to improve.

Similarly, my problem with Chancellor Rhee is that she isn't focused on this reality. She blames teachers for being inadequate, without focusing on the system and culture in place. Or more accurately, she believes the system and culture to be inadequate, and believes that by firing everyone and hiring fresh she can do better, but she doesn't recognize the need to have robust systems, processes, and structures in place to build the strength in the system and a systemic demand for excellence. Instead she focuses on individuals, personalizing a system, and therefore condemning it to continued mediocrity.

Nothing prevents a school system with the less privileged kids to have great teacher development systems. That's a failure of the people running the system. And that's the whole point of the need for great and robust systems. DC has the money. It just doesn't have the focus or concern. And if its the fault of race based privilege, it's not a white thing. cf. _Black Social Capital_ by Marion Orr.

... in relationship to the point that Montgomery County schools have recognized that while high income children succeed, that they needed to go above and beyond and add resources and development and assistance systems in order to help lower income children succeed as well as the high income children within the same school district.