"Why are grades OK from the time you're in fourth grade to the time you get your MBA, but not OK once you're an adult?" Welch questions. If Welch were to talk about education he may say "You need to use the same rigor to evaluate (teachers) that you use to evaluate your (test scores)." Using a ranking system requires administrators to be honest about what they are seeing and teachers to be honest about how they are performing in the classroom.
Managing out the bottom 10 percent of performers will be one of the hardest things to do, but is necessary not only for a school to continue to succeed but also for the sake of employees affected when the bottom performers are allowed to stay. "People need to know where they stand," Welch said. "Failing to differentiate among employees—and holding on to bottom-tier performers—is actually the cruelest form of (leadership) there is." As an administrator I work under the motto that my job is to "Help them out, or Help them out." Comments?
7 comments:
So true, not knowing where you stand is cruel. Being lumped in with everyone else does not make anyone feel better- it makes those who work hard to excel wonder if their effort is noticed.
It's good to hear other educators on the same page about good teaching. We need to take a serious look at how we evaluate and help teachers improve.
If they aren't enjoying teaching and don't want to continue it professionally, then they should be helped transition out.
I get the point about there being some teachers who do not belong in the profession. I think /hope that better ed. programs at the university are weeding some of these out.
But....do we want to put a percentage on it and try to get rid of this number periodically? Attrition of new teachers is very high. What is the usually quoted stat that half of new teachers don't make it past three years. This process has to be getting rid of many teachers who do not fit the profession.
Finally should we apply the same principles to students and just kick out the "bottom 10%"? I think not.
Are they participating because they 'want to' or 'have to'. Do they refuse to buy a new car unless the manufacturer removes all technology post 1984? The reality is that eLearning is now a composite part of teaching. This problem, is not limited to teachers - administrators are also non-participants with entrenched ideology. They talk about 21st Century classrooms, but often to little personally. The rot is at the top as well as the bottom.
Is it fair to assume that every aspect of low test scores is a direct result of poor teaching? In the 20-70-10 model the assumptions are that the conditions for results are held constant. Many variables are involved in test scores that are beyond the control of solely the classroom teacher. I agree that accountability is absolutely critical, however we must seek it at all levels. Environment, interruptions, support & student apathy are just a few of the variables that enter in. It is indeed a complex problem without a simple solution.
What if you're a top 10% teacher who is teaching the bottom 10% of the students? With this model, how do you EVER get anyone to work with at-risk students? And how do you evaluate administrators, phys ed teachers, school nurses, tech directors, and school librarians whose efforts are less directly linked to test scores?
@ Ed
I like the focus on quality teaching. I don't know if the draconian ten percent axe of Welch is the solution. I watched Daniel Pink's TED talk on motivation recently and found it to be somewhat relevant to the discussion. I do agree pulling the trigger and letting go of the dead weight has to happen for an organization to renew itself.
Post a Comment