Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity


Posted at 10:30 AM ET, 01/ 9/2011

How to be taken seriously as a reformer (don't be an educator)

By Valerie Strauss

This was written by Gregory Michie, who teaches in the Department of Foundations, Social, Policy and Research at Concordia University Chicago. He is the author of "Holler If You Hear Me: The Education of a Teacher and His Students" and co-editor of "City Kids, City Schools: More Reports from the Front Row."

By Gregory Michie
In the current upside-down world of education policy, there's one foolproof strategy for being taken seriously as a reformer: Make sure you're not an educator.

Urban districts nationwide, with Chicago leading the way, have hired those with business or legal backgrounds to head their school systems. Major voices in the reform conversation such as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and philanthropist Eli Broad have never been teachers. And when Oprah wants to talk about schools, she invites Bill Gates or Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg -- all the while reminding her audience how much she loves teachers.

So it probably shouldn't come as a huge surprise that "Performance Counts," a proposal that zoomed to the top of the legislative agenda in Illinois last week promising to "promote great teaching," boasts a roster of local supporters who aren't exactly known for their educational expertise: the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago, the Illinois Chamber of Commerce, and the Illinois Business Roundtable.

Backers of Performance Counts say it's pro-student, not anti-teacher or anti-union, but the wide-ranging changes it proposes are nearly all aimed at the state's teachers. The legislation would link tenure decisions to performance evaluations, make it easier to fire teachers, prohibit them from negotiating on issues such as class size, and make it virtually impossible for them to go on strike.

It's also no shock that the proposal has gained traction among corporate-minded reformers. It fits nicely within a narrative that's been gathering momentum since early last year, when both President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan publicly applauded the mass firing of teachers at a Rhode Island high school: Our public schools are woeful, and teachers are a big part of the problem.

Shortly after the firings, Newsweek accompanied its cover story, "The key to saving American education," with a photo of the words "We must fire bad teachers" written repeatedly on a chalkboard. More recently, the much-discussed film Waiting for Superman hammered home the same theme, depicting teachers as dozing mopes in New York City's infamous "rubber room" or screaming lunatics manipulated by out-of-touch unions.

But focusing on getting rid of weak teachers as a cornerstone of school reform is a distraction from the kinds of changes we should be pursuing.

What kinds of changes? Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union, said in response to Performance Counts: "How do you improve schools? Lower class sizes, limit instructional time spent on standardized testing, fund schools based on need, not clout, and be sure that all children receive a full diet of art, music, physical education and foreign languages."

That'd be a good start. And it's what affluent parents -- including the Duncans and the Obamas -- demand for their own kids.

But the mainstream discussion about schools has a decidedly different character. An underlying assumption of almost every utterance is that standardized tests are an essential tool and are here to stay. Poverty's not on the radar. And the arts? What arts?

A big part of the problem is that the conversation has been hijacked by corporate leaders who think they know best how to improve our schools. I'll concede that some of these "new reformers" may have good intentions. But their arrogance is astounding, and their lack of interest in the wisdom of those who spend their days in classrooms speaks volumes.

The thing is, it's tough to understand the complexity of teaching if you've never done it. Sure, it's possible to come up with catchy slogans like "performance counts." But what exactly is teacher performance? For most of the business-minded reformers, it means raising student test scores. They may nod toward multiple measures of assessing teachers, but they're really looking at "the data," the bottom line.

During the decade I spent teaching in Chicago, I came to understand that being a good teacher is about far more than that. It's taking time after school hours to get to know the community in which you teach. It's figuring out how to create an opportunity for learning when one of your students uses racist or homophobic language in class. It's effectively planning research projects when your classroom has just two computers for 31 kids. How does "performance count" in situations like these?

I'm not trying to dodge the issues raised by the proposed Illinois legislation. And I would agree, as would many teachers I know, that tenure and evaluation processes need to be revisited and improved. But if we're serious about making schools places where meaningful learning happens, not just test prep, then directing our energies toward further dis-empowering and firing teachers is a horribly misguided approach. What's really strangling the life out of classrooms across this country are the myopic, test-crazy policies of the past 10 years.

Then again, I'm an education professor, so what do I know about schools? Maybe only this: If you really want to understand what's going on in them and the direction we need to be headed, don't ask Bill Gates or the Business Roundtable. Ask a teacher.

-0-

Follow my blog every day by bookmarking washingtonpost.com/answersheet. And for admissions advice, college news and links to campus papers, please check out our Higher Education page at washingtonpost.com/higher-ed Bookmark it!


By Valerie Strauss  | January 9, 2011; 10:30 AM ET
Categories:  Guest Bloggers, Standardized Tests, Teacher assessment, Teachers  | Tags:  Illiinois schools, Performance Counts, bill gates, eli broad, jeb bush, mark zuckerberg, obama and schools, obama daughters and school, oprah, performance counts, president obama and daughters, school reform, sidwell and obama, standardized tests, teacher assessment, teachers  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Why Fairfax's textbook recall is surprising
Next: Banned student play will go on!

Comments

Renaissance Man: A man who has broad intellectual interests and is accomplished in areas of both the arts and the sciences.
___________________

"And the arts? What arts?"

Thank you, Gregory Michie, for bringing up the arts. In this whole crazy reform movement, it is astounding to me that our Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, had the nerve to associate his work in Chicago with the Renaissance, emphasizing competition and choice, with the arts only addressed as a specialized area; now, from his current platform, I have yet to read anything about the importance of the arts to one who would be considered learned in the tradition of a Renaissance person.

And what of innovation? The business community constantly cries for innovation, but much training of the mind for that very special attribute comes from experience with one or more of the arts. It is no accident that many scientists and doctors also play a musical instrument, or that great architects have a keen understanding of visual art.

And what of Shakespeare? Well before Freud and the field of psychology, Shakespeare saw how the theater could give people an understanding of human nature.

And dance, often the poorest of the arts, has a unique ability to combine physical strength, flexibility, personal expression and music.

Overlooking poverty is to overlook an impoverishment of the human essence as well, and if we keep on the current track so many of the current reformers are espousing, we will be a poor nation indeed.

Posted by: PLMichaelsArtist-at-Large | January 9, 2011 11:30 AM | Report abuse

... "But their arrogance is astounding, and their lack of interest in the wisdom of those who spend their days in classrooms speaks volumes."

AMEN!!!

And a related "MUST-READ" to Gregory Michie's piece today is "Teachers Should be Seen and Not Heard" by the 2009 National Teacher of the Year, Anthony Mullen.

http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/teacher_of_the_year/2010/01/teachers_should_be_seen_and_no.html

Posted by: MisterRog | January 9, 2011 11:31 AM | Report abuse

to:PLMichaelsArtist-at-Large

I just want to let you know that I so appreciate reading your insightful commentaries and seem to always find myself nodding in agreement! I am an art teacher and always mention to my students about how important it is to exercise our imaginative and creative minds! That we must be willing to take risks and to see new paths set by our accidental "failures". I love mentioning to students how velcro was discovered or how plastics were discovered to encourage them to get beyond this fear of failure or their belief that there is a "right and wrong answer"... that this "standardized testing climate" has promoted. Renaissance is about rebirth so lets hope that there is a rebirth in the spirit of humanity... all those tasty tidbits that make us lovers of life-long learning!

Posted by: teachermd | January 9, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Right on point. Thanks, MisterRog. The article "Teachers Should Be Seen and Not Heard" by Anthony Mullen is fantastic!

Posted by: bugrad | January 9, 2011 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Another excellent posting; thanks, Valorie for giving Gregory this opportunity to expose the inverted reality of whose voice matters. I am now working on the need for us to speak expert to celebrity in 2011, and Gregory's voice is the evidence of the former. . .

Posted by: plthomas3 | January 9, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Yes, of course the Obamas and the Duncans know perfectly well how best to educate their children, and so do many of the rest of us. In a nutshell you:

Make certain your children's basic needs are met;

Find a school with small classes and well-behaved and high-achieving students.

In this recession politicians know that there is no money to provide the poor with the same type of education offered to the affluent, but they need to let the voters think they are doing something and so they are scapegoating teachers. Well, the District of Columbia and Central Falls R.I. have given us a good glimpse into the futility of that approach. Read about the last episodes at Central Falls. Who failed those students: the teachers or the leaders who made life-changing decisions without ever teaching a single child?

The effects of the recession are now beginning to wane and so will teacher-bashing, especially since the female labor force is now going into all fields. Big changes are already happening in California with the new governor who has already rejected the anti-teacher focus. He's smart enough to know that a huge teacher shortage is projected for the next decade. "As California goes, so goes the nation."

While we're waiting for better days to return, three things would help education enormously:

Journalists could interview experts in education instead of repeating the ideas of rich and powerful people who have never taught;

Districts, such as D.C. could insist on fully qualified teachers with proven track records of success for their high-needs schools.

Philanthropists could focus on the preschool years, where so many of our educational problems begin.

Posted by: Linda/RetiredTeacher | January 9, 2011 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Everyone would love a simple answer to this. Do these new "experts" really think that no one has ever thought of their ideas? I do agree that we would all love to think that a test would solve all the problems of evaluating students and teachers-and rewarding them. However, it does not.

I think of the saying, "nothing is new under the sun." When I was teaching poor children in the projects in the 1970's (elementary school), I took a summer workshop paid for by Title One. I learned some great things in that workshop, but I also learned lots of things that did not work. The "open classroom" was "in". I went back to school that Fall all excited about this and talked about it with one of the older teachers. Her comment was "I went through that with Dewey in North Carolina in the thirties--it didn't work then, and it is not going to work now!" I went ahead with my plans--and, to my surprise, she was right. However, I did continue to use aspects of this program which I did find helpful and useful. Open classrooms may work for some teachers, it did not work for me.

The same could be said for these highly structured programs being pushed now. When the program is so structured that the teacher cannot deviate from it, I do not think they work. It is too hard to stay on script when you are dealing with a dynamic environment. Shifting groups of children around from teacher to teacher can get quite complicated, as well.

My suggestion: put prospective teachers in the school early in their training. Start them with individual students and work into groups before putting them in front of classrooms. Let them see what works for them. Not all children are the same and neither are all teachers. What works for one may not work for another.

All administrators should have experience working directly with individual students and with large groups of students. They must have a sense of the trails that teachers go through. This is the problem with the "outsiders." They look at it in black and white.

Posted by: mmkm | January 9, 2011 1:18 PM | Report abuse

The Teach for America program has publicized one fact about K-12 teaching that has been established for many years but not well-known by the general public:

The brightest college students do not consider K-12 teaching as a career, and when they do, they usually leave after two or three years. Many of these people don't view teaching children (as opposed to teaching adults) as a worthy career choice. This is probably the primary source of our teacher probems. In all countries with enviable systems of education, teaching people of all ages is a highly regarded profession.

So our focus should be on recruiting and retaining well-qualified teachers since we already know how to get rid of them. I suggest the time-honored strategies of higher salaries, professional autonomy and better working conditions. A dash of prestige might help too.

Posted by: Linda/RetiredTeacher | January 9, 2011 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Gregory Michie- Another education professor who defends ineffective teachers he keeps sending to the classroom.

The real problem isn't "teachers" per say. The problem is that anyone can become a teacher. The bar has been set so low for receiving teacher credentials that almost anyone with a pulse can become a teacher...many of the teachers, particularly in our most challenging schools, are not smart people. Let's be honest the profession of education is attracting many people who don't like competition, innovation or accountability. Why? Because education pays people on a step scale, not performance. So, if you suck and have more years then someone who is effective you are actually rewarded while the person who is more effective makes more money and has more protection- this doesn't increase innovation and it certainly doesn't attract smart, dedicated professionals.

This approach, favored by unions, attracts lazy people who want job security and career changers who couldn't make it in the private sector. Add to this that colleges give anyone breathing a credential in education and a license and you have a deep pool of incompetent idiots.

If you want people to revere teachers and you want to shift success give principals total autonomy over their budgets- let them determine the salaries of their teachers and set aside parts of their budgets for performance bonuses, and allow them to fire people who suck and just want a job for life. And immediately, you will attract the best college graduates, the smartest people and the most innovative educators. And you won't even have to prescribe to these people what they have to teach. All you will have to do is tell them the end goal and they will find ways to hit the target.

Currently, idiot teachers and the unions who protect them stifle creativity and financial incentives. If you give a principal a $5,000,000.00 budget and she finds a terrific candidate why shouldn't the principal be allowed to offer a $10,000.00 signing bonus and a great salary. If we could do this we would need fewer teachers and attract really intelligent people. This would change education and lead to tremendous results!

Imagine this scenario: A principal hires who she wants without consulting parents and inferior personnel- a process in DCPS that is hysterically stupid! A principal interviews a great candidate and starts the candidate at $80,000.00 and cuts 2 ineffective people who make $40,000.00 each. The principal offers this new candidate bonuses for content expertise, student assessment growth, professional development time and innovative approaches to student learning. What do you think would happen? I'll tell you- the 2 ineffective teachers would be fired and the new, smart and innovative teacher would change the results....

This isn't rocket science...give principals autonomy over hiring, salaries, bonuses and firing and you will attract the best candidates and change the results!

Posted by: teacher6402 | January 9, 2011 1:52 PM | Report abuse

I just posted an interesting look inside my classroom this week. Not sure how evaluators would grade my attempts to get all my students to commit to reading The Crucible, but I have found that a little carrot and a little stick goes a long way. Not sure what to call that technique. If possible, you might want to visit teachermandc.com and see how my week in class went.

Posted by: dcproud1 | January 9, 2011 2:06 PM | Report abuse

to teachermd: Thank you! I should have guessed you were a fellow art teacher as your comments have me nodding my head in agreement as well. Our philosophies in education sound quite similar. Also glad that you are still teaching!

Posted by: PLMichaelsArtist-at-Large | January 9, 2011 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I often chuckle to myself when I hear the cry for "jobs creation" but as a public school art teacher know how little emphasis school division's (and I would go so far as to say ALL school division's) place on the arts or any other elective, for that matter.

I have a poster hanging on my classroom door that lists about 200 jobs/occupations that are directly related to the arts. The arts are a multi-billion dollar business when we include all the possiblities. If we want to educate our children to be prepared for a lifetime of earnings, we are making a grave mistake when limiting our children to just math and science curriculum.

Our job as teachers is to open doors, create opportunities, initiate creative thinking and problem-solving skills, plant seeds for a future, develop a curiosity for learning...not just teach kids that a #2 pencil is preferred for filling out bubble sheets.

I believe all students should have some exposure to the arts before they leave high school.

But as Mr. Michie says...they never ask a teacher.

Posted by: ilcn | January 9, 2011 4:24 PM | Report abuse

The most intelligent statement from this article notes, "...focusing on getting rid of weak teachers as a cornerstone of school reform is a distraction from the kinds of changes we should be pursuing." That's right on the money, for me. There's much more to ed reform than the small percentage of anemic teachers; state and federal teacher unions (although the AFT has made significant improvements since Randi Weingarten became their president), poverty and non-existent parenting skills, lack of value in poor/minority communities on a quality education, to name just a few.

Now, from the bizarre side of the column, "If you really want to understand what's going on in school and the direction we need to be headed, don't ask Bill Gates or the Business Roundtable. Ask a teacher."

Gregory, Gregory, Gregory, Why exactly do you think teachers and the rest of the educational establishment have been left out of the ed reform debate? Who was in charge of our schools prior to A Nation At Risk and No Child Left Behind? The educational establishment, and our schools were a disaster.

There was no plan anywhere, from anyone, as to what was supposed to be taught in or when it was supposed to be taught.

As absent as this "PLAN" was there was even less from the accountability realm, if that was possible. Students were the recipients of ubiquitous grade inflation, social promotions, and everyone graduating from high school, regardless of performance or effort.

Teachers being evaluated? The evaluation process in most districts across the country has been an embarrassment to the profession. Many are never evaluated (not their fault) and the subjective administrative evaluations used in most districts somehow have most everyone coming out as "satisfactory."

If there was no plan and no accountability, who was it again in charge of this mayhem, this pell mell chaos?

That's right Greg. It was teachers and the educational establishment but they all seem to conveniently forget all about this when this discussion arises.

All someone has to do is read an article like this and they can figure out real fast why our schools are a joke and sinking fast.

Posted by: phoss1 | January 9, 2011 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone noticed the great achievements of the American people? We seem to excel in almost any human endeavor: law, government, medicine, academia, business, sports, the arts, defense and so forth. Name any prize and Americans are nicely represented among the winners. We are still first in productivity and the place to be if you are interested in technology and innovation. Our graduate schools are considered the best in the world and so many of the world's elite send their children to the United States to be educated.

Most of these talented and productive Americans attended our great public school system. Many of our own children have graduated from these schools and are easily able to compete with anyone in the world.

This is the proud and great legacy of the American schoolteacher, most of whom are women (sadly related to the current bashing). So it goes without saying that many (most?) of us do not agree with Phoss1. To us the great American public school system is among our greatest institutions and one that must be preserved. Have many children been poorly served? Yes, but to that we say: Let's strengthen, not destroy, a great system that has been a wonderful gift to so many of us. Let's find a way to make our public schools work for EVERY child and not just the children of the majority.

Posted by: Linda/RetiredTeacher | January 9, 2011 5:47 PM | Report abuse

It's a tad pathetic to claim one cannot "understand" or have a supportable opinion on teacher quality if one has not been a teacher.
There are about 6 mil teachers active in our society and millions more who used to be. Plus, we have all had teachers and many of us are parents.
We know good teaching and bad when we see it. This is hardly some exclusive club. And good teaching is not a mystery.

And since we pay for education and care for our children, it is our right to speak up and demand that we only have only good and effective teachers in the classrooms.

Ducking evaluations and bombing anyone who just may voice an opinion only raises doubt about teacher quality in the first place.

Posted by: axolotl | January 9, 2011 5:55 PM | Report abuse

From phoss1:
"...There was no plan anywhere, from anyone, as to what was supposed to be taught in or when it was supposed to be taught.... "
_______

Hello?!? I started teaching in the mid-70s, and during those years and all of those following, there was always a state curriculum, sequencing of classes like math, science & languages, class objectives, reports, evaluations and - *gasp* - tests.....

The real deal is that education is constantly in flux and evolving much as our society evolves and changes.

Posted by: PLMichaelsArtist-at-Large | January 9, 2011 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Always a state curriculum?

September 5, 2005, New York Times editorial, "Our schools are without a plan. They are being run by DEFAULT by local school boards and textbook publishers because the people from within the system have never formally developed anything."

What state was that you taught in? A state curriculum? I don't think so, Betty.

If states had plans, why was there bi-partisan support for NCLB in 2001-2002, with its initiation of standards based reform? Just why were the standards finally insisted upon? The standards, artists-at-large was to FINALLY put a plan in place as to what was to be taught and at what grade level.

Posted by: phoss1 | January 9, 2011 6:31 PM | Report abuse

"What's really strangling the life out of classrooms across this country are the myopic, test-crazy policies of the past 10 years."

What an awful educator you must be. Without testing, how do you know if the students learned anything? Of course you had tests...

Posted by: staticvars | January 9, 2011 7:21 PM | Report abuse

I taught for 42 years and there was always a curriculum. For most of the time the curriculum was determined by the school district but at the end of my career there was a state curriculum. A curriculum is a set of courses and their content offered by a school or college. How can a school not have a curriculum?

When you say there is no curriculum, what do you mean, Phoss?

Posted by: Linda/RetiredTeacher | January 9, 2011 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Phoss..." Who was in charge of our schools prior to A Nation At Risk and No Child Left Behind? The educational establishment, and our schools were a disaster."

Really?

You need to step away from the kool-aid fountain of political rhetoric. Look around you. Consider the advances in medicine, technology, science, etc. Many of these advances are from individuals who were part of the public school system pre-Nation At Risk/NCLB.

Posted by: teachermom3 | January 9, 2011 9:03 PM | Report abuse

teachermom,

Our dynasty has ended. "Students from China and India aren't racing to the bottom, they're racing to the top. They don't want to be like us, they want to DOMINATE us." (Tom Friedman, The World Is Flat, 2005.) They're producing more STEM college graduates than us, and for anyone who has followed this issue, the country who leads in STEM knowledge will be the leaders of the world tomorrow.

And BTW, I have looked around. Have you seen the results of the recent PISA tests? US students continue to tumble in their precipitous decline academically.

Posted by: phoss1 | January 10, 2011 11:17 AM | Report abuse

A few thoughts:

"This isn't rocket science...give principals autonomy over hiring, salaries, bonuses and firing and you will attract the best candidates and change the results!"

A lot of the research I've seen regarding recruitment and attrition of our smartest teachers -- high-performing traditional certification, TFA, etc. -- seems to suggest that their attrition less in pay and more in working conditions. Urban schools are very hard to work in and burnout is common. My fear is that even if we create these mighty pay incentives (not an idea without merit, mind you), we'll still have a hard time convincing good people to work there unless we can find a way to make the work environment better. Just a thought.

"We know good teaching and bad when we see it. This is hardly some exclusive club. And good teaching is not a mystery."

I think most of us have some general idea of what good teaching looks like (usually because we all examples from our own education) but knowing what good food tastes like and knowing how to properly cook good food are two very different enterprises. Teaching is more of a mystery than we would like to admit: Jaime Escalante, for example, is widely regarded as one of the greatest teachers ever but other teachers at Garfield could not replicate his results even when he used his instructional methods. Likewise, Bill Gates has invested millions in his MET study to find out what makes good teachers. Everyone seems to have a clearer idea of what the outcomes should be, but figuring out what gets you there is another matter.

"Our dynasty has ended. "Students from China and India aren't racing to the bottom, they're racing to the top. They don't want to be like us, they want to DOMINATE us." (Tom Friedman, The World Is Flat, 2005.) They're producing more STEM college graduates than us, and for anyone who has followed this issue, the country who leads in STEM knowledge will be the leaders of the world tomorrow."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703766704576008692493038646.html

A quote: "...China has no problem producing mid-level accountants, computer programmers and technocrats. But what about the entrepreneurs and innovators needed to run a 21st century global economy? China's most promising students still must go abroad to develop their managerial drive and creativity, and there they have to unlearn the test-centric approach to knowledge that was drilled into them."

Posted by: joshofstl1 | January 10, 2011 1:31 PM | Report abuse

This article is so full of holes it's almost funny. The thesis is that:

Urban districts nationwide...have hired those with business or legal backgrounds to head their school systems. Major voices in the reform conversation such as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and philanthropist Eli Broad have never been teachers. And when Oprah wants to talk about schools, she invites Bill Gates or Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg....

None of the four people you list head an urban school district. Three of them are philanthropists who are active in education reform but also in many other issues.

Who did run an urban school district until very recently (and who else does Oprah go to in education issues?). MIchelle Rhee, a former teacher (now replaced by Kaya Henderson, a former teacher). Both have devoted their careers to helping kids living in POVERTY access better schools (this issue is ALWAYS on the radar for these and most other "no excuses" education reformers I know).

Who else was a former teacher? Joel Klein, who was always clear that his goal was reducing poverty through education reform.

Are these well-known education leaders any less former teachers because you don't happen to agree with their views?

All teachers are not the same, not all are putting in the extra hours you describe (I know, because I was a teacher too). And it is kids in poverty who are most heavily impacted by this. It's not a small thing, especially for the children spending years of their valuable time in classrooms where effective teaching is not happening.


Posted by: kellyamis | January 10, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Arne Duncan, Barack Obama and Bill Gates should just come and say they hate teachers, and want to destroy them. It would be so much more honest than pretending to support teachers.

Posted by: educationlover54 | January 10, 2011 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Young people should be warned not to go into teaching. There are too many people who want to exploit teachers, while calling themselves reformers.

Particularly young women should be warned about not going into teaching. They should be warned how many people are out to destroy them.

Posted by: educationlover54 | January 10, 2011 2:42 PM | Report abuse

MIchelle Rhee, a former teacher (now replaced by Kaya Henderson, a former teacher). Both have devoted their careers to helping kids living in POVERTY access better schools (this issue is ALWAYS on the radar for these and most other "no excuses" education reformers I know).


SORRY BUT I HAVE FOLLOWED MICHELLE RHEE'S CAREER AND I KNOW SHE HAS NOT DEVOTED HERSELF TO HELPING KIDS IN POVERTY.

DON'T EXPECT PEOPLE WHO KNOW THE TRUTH ABOUT RHEE TO BELIEVE YOU.

Posted by: educationlover54 | January 10, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

This is a great article. But the fools who run our educational policy will never listen. That is why it is time to warn young people about those who want to put a gun to the heads of teachers. Tell young people that these people are more than willing to put a gun to their head also.

Posted by: educationlover54 | January 10, 2011 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Tell young people not to go into teaching, and tell people in teaching to get out. There are too many people in power bullying teachers.

Posted by: jlp19 | January 10, 2011 5:49 PM | Report abuse

What did Eli Broad teach me? That he used the cheapest possible building materials and labor to build http://www.akbhomesucks.com the "B" in KB Home stands for "Broad". It might as well stand for the B*|| this guy is shoveling. Future generations will not really care who Eli Broad and his cracker Jack Homebuilding Enterprise. Eli Broad teaches you that it's OK to use deceptive building practices as long as the big profits roll in. The little guy is paying for all the golden coins that seem to be manifesting from this gods palms.

Posted by: LemonMeister | January 10, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Some very excellent points made. I personally think that teachers are underpaid and overworked and yes there are some bad ones to be weeded out but isn't this what principals are paid to do. I also agree that testing is not a way to judge a teachers performance as there are students that are good in taking tests and there are students that cannot handle testing well, but are good students and thus testing is not a good measurement on the ability of a teacher. Large class size can and will put a huge burden on a teachers ability to teach and
thus can hinder learning and testing. I am not a teacher but I know and have dealt with many over my 68 years of life.

LK

Posted by: ariakay | January 15, 2011 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company