In March of this last year, I wrote a post about respect. Teachers have to walk that fine line between an entertainer and a disciplinarian. We have to garner respect with our students and with their parents that send their kids to us. How do people react when you tell them what you do? I get an unusual reaction for a teacher. I get a response of surprise and some admiration for teaching a hard subject like Physics. There is some respect there, more for the material than the profession. Unfortunately, this respect for my subject does not really translate to my profession. I constantly have to deal with the fact that I could be making more money and work less hours in business. Since our society equates success with money, teachers are naturally at the low end of the respect spectrum.
President Obama is looking to change that perception of teachers. His new program called Project RESPECT (Recognizing Educational Success Professional Excellence and Collaborative Teaching), looks to increase the respect that people have for the profession. The program is not a new concept. It seems that everyone has weighed in on how to increase respect for the profession. Salary is the first topic that comes up. I would love to make more money, and I do not think that you would find a teacher that would disagree with getting a raise. The problem with increasing the teacher salaries is that ALL teachers get more money. It is not merit based. I do not make more for teaching a subject that requires more time than a friend that teaches elementary education.
Salary is not alone. The project looks to make teacher programs more selective, thus reducing the number of people teaching because they do not have anything better to do. If you know anything about teaching, you know that the teacher that gets in it for the hours typically does not last very long. Other parts of this program have a lot of importance in furthering the profession. Tenure needs to be reevaluated. Higher salaries should mean that each year the teachers are reevaluated. If a teacher is weak than he or she should be removed.
This program really stands out in that it calls for a career ladder. Currently, if I am a good or a great teacher at my subject, there is not really a higher level that I can go to. This means that if a teacher wants to make more money they have one option, administration. Good teachers are lost for higher paying positions. Teachers that move out of the classroom lose touch with the kids and loose that perspective. This disconnect alone accounts for the large divide between administrators and teachers.
The program has a good heart. I agree with President Obama and Arne Duncan that something needs to be done. What we need however is not a vague outline of how to rehabilitate the image of the teacher. We need a clear plan. What law makers have to realize is that if we try and operate in a system that has some serious flaws we are limiting ourselves. I think we have to open up the discussion in the community and look for solutions that may not be the most comfortable for everyone involved.
Until next week,
The task of the excellent teacher is to stimulate "apparently ordinary" people to unusual effort. The tough problem is not in identifying winners: it is in making winners out of ordinary people. ~K. Patricia Cross
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Eye of the tiger
It is interesting to sit in a teacher's lounge and listen to teachers talk at lunch. The other day, a government teacher that happens to be a coach, was speaking about a banquet that the sports program has every year. At this banquet, awards are given out for top performers. She informed us that every player gets a participation award. Sports to me symbolize the spirit of america. They are a competition that results in a winner and a loser. Participation awards seem to cheapen this competition. This shows that there are not really winners or losers, but everyone wins with a nice certificate after the season is over.
In the district that I work in these participation awards are called out and and handed to each student as if they were getting an MVP. When I was a kid I did not play that many sports, but I was involved in Tee ball and then in little league. My team was horrible. Each time we lost it taught us about being a good sport and making sure that we were prepared for the wins and the loses in the future. This teaches us something. It is this compeditive spirit that we should embrace. Instead, we try to make everyone feel better. Our grandparents, or in some cases our parents, fought in a war to help keep us free. There was no consolation prize. No participation trophy for participating in the war. Only winners and losers.
This spirit of competition echoes in the halls of some of the greatest schools in the country. Where would Harvard be without competition, or UT. In K-12 education, we often look to see what the charter and the magnate schools are doing. The root of this success is good teachers and competition. People have to apply to get in. The process of getting into the school means that you really have to want it. Having the winners and the losers out of that makes the kids feel better when they get in, but it also breeds investment. Children are invested and so are their parents. Their parents then look at it as an oppertunity and push their kids harder. This parental investment is part of the keys to success for a child in school.
Not everyone can get into a charter school. This I believe is the future though. How much more investment would parents have if their kids had to apply to a high school? This is how europe does it, and combine it with a program that either prepares the child for a college level education, or prepares them for a vocational persuit. To solve the woes of the educational system, we have to play to our strengths, competition.
In the district that I work in these participation awards are called out and and handed to each student as if they were getting an MVP. When I was a kid I did not play that many sports, but I was involved in Tee ball and then in little league. My team was horrible. Each time we lost it taught us about being a good sport and making sure that we were prepared for the wins and the loses in the future. This teaches us something. It is this compeditive spirit that we should embrace. Instead, we try to make everyone feel better. Our grandparents, or in some cases our parents, fought in a war to help keep us free. There was no consolation prize. No participation trophy for participating in the war. Only winners and losers.
This spirit of competition echoes in the halls of some of the greatest schools in the country. Where would Harvard be without competition, or UT. In K-12 education, we often look to see what the charter and the magnate schools are doing. The root of this success is good teachers and competition. People have to apply to get in. The process of getting into the school means that you really have to want it. Having the winners and the losers out of that makes the kids feel better when they get in, but it also breeds investment. Children are invested and so are their parents. Their parents then look at it as an oppertunity and push their kids harder. This parental investment is part of the keys to success for a child in school.
Not everyone can get into a charter school. This I believe is the future though. How much more investment would parents have if their kids had to apply to a high school? This is how europe does it, and combine it with a program that either prepares the child for a college level education, or prepares them for a vocational persuit. To solve the woes of the educational system, we have to play to our strengths, competition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)