[cecnj]

While a teacher must certainly be held accountable, the onus rests also on students, parents, and administrators. The child whose parent allows hours of video game play each evening followed by sugary cereal for breakfast the following morning is doing little to help that student succeed academically. The parent who substitutes television for books in the home does little to help his son or daughter to develop strong reading comprehension skills. To expect test results to hinge solely on a teacher is akin to expecting a diabetic person to be healed simply because the doctor provides professional instruction on diet and exercise. If the diabetic person ignores the advice, continues to damage the body by ignoring doctor's advice, the condition will, of course, worsen.

[jfkIII]

Originally Posted by dynimagelv

teacher forgot to tell him not to do that or hed go blind....

He's always been known as a "rising" student. He studies hard.

[quixotic59]

Originally Posted by MrBator

It is the teacher job to prepare their students to do well on the state tests period! That is what they are hired to do and that is how everyone in the school system is measured. The parents, the administrators, the media, the government and the bussiness world all demand the students pass the test. If the teacher can not get the job done they need to be fired. If you do not like the system then you have two choices. Keep bitching about it or get out and make a change. Start here: www.alfiekohn.com

First of all, nothing is "the teacher job", it's "the teacher's job". Second, it is NOT the teacher's job to prepare students to do well on a test. It is the teacher's job to EDUCATE students. It was NEVER the teacher's job to prepare students for a test and the "bussiness" (that would be "business") world couldn't care less about tests. Also, any parent that sends their child to school just to be taught how to pass tests should be neutered. As for the media, they are simply a bunch of morons. A teacher is supposed to present the OPPORTUNITY for learning. Teachers cannot force students to learn. It is the parents' job to instill an appreciation for knowledge and success in their children and the teachers' job to be ready to provide the instruction to satisfy the students' needs. By the way, the only ones "bitchin'" are the crooks trying to turn schools into profit centers.

Originally Posted by cecnj

While a teacher must certainly be held accountable, the onus rests also on students, parents, and administrators. The child whose parent allows hours of video game play each evening followed by sugary cereal for breakfast the following morning is doing little to help that student succeed academically. The parent who substitutes television for books in the home does little to help his son or daughter to develop strong reading comprehension skills. To expect test results to hinge solely on a teacher is akin to expecting a diabetic person to be healed simply because the doctor provides professional instruction on diet and exercise. If the diabetic person ignores the advice, continues to damage the body by ignoring doctor's advice, the condition will, of course, worsen.

Well put!

[Trash Can]

Originally Posted by quixotic59

Second, it is NOT the teacher's job to prepare students to do well on a test. It is the teacher's job to EDUCATE students

I agree with very little of what you post, but this statement is spot on.

There's a lot of debate about state tests and if they are a valid measure of whether students are really learning or not. Grades and tests scores are important, but I'd rather have my son get C's and actually learn something than get A's and score high on state tests while hardly learning anything.

[SportyandMisty]

Here is an interesting interview with the National Education Association Teachers Union Chief Randi Weingarten on charter schools, reformers Michelle Rhee and Joel Klein, and her star turn in 'Waiting for Superman.' one of the following links should work.

WSJ.com - Opinion: Weingarten for the Union Defense

The Weekend Interview: Randi Weingarten for the Union Defense - WSJ.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704608504576208443882799456.html

And here is a youtube speach by retiring NEA General Counsel on NEA & its mission. It has some color commentary in the form of graphics overlay that can be ignored, but his words are pretty accurate.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLxZ9V2ns84

[olecapt]

The LA Times series made it quite clear that nobody actually knew who the effective teachers were.

So if you don't test...how do you tell?

I therefore presume testing to be a neccessary evil. And I fail to see what other criteria it is that will tell us whether a teacher is effective or not.

[jfkIII]

I'm sure the students know who are the dedicated teachers...we sure did when we went to school. Of course, the slacker teachers were the most popular (for what you could get away with!)...but when you think back to your favorite teacher...it was usually someone dedicated to the field, who left some sort of valuable impression on you. Students should do yearly ratings on the teachers...the truth would come out.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by olecapt

... The recent LA Times series made it quite clear that no one actually knows who the good teachers are...

...

There is a difference between "no one actually knows" and "it is inherently unknowable".

If no one truly knows, it must be because no one is evaluating the teachers carefully. Perhaps each school needs a "Chief Teaching Officer" whose sole job is & is paid & measured solely on his/her ability to determine who the bad teachers are. I say this in jest, of course, but you get the idea.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

There is a difference between "no one actually knows" and "it is inherently unknowable".

If no one truly knows, it must be because no one is evaluating the teachers carefully. Perhaps each school needs a "Chief Teaching Officer" whose sole job is & is paid & measured solely on his/her ability to determine who the bad teachers are. I say this in jest, of course, but you get the idea.

Actually what the Times found was that you could identify the top and the bottom but the 80% middle was statistically inseparable. It made it reasonably clear that the supposedly knowledgable were not. ie Principals, Deans, Administrators and heavily involved parents could not identify who was good or bad.

I would think it is certainly knowable to a higher level than it is presently practiced. It is a complex problem though and may not be fully knowable with the art presently available. And there certainly may be many particular circumstances that hopelessly obscure the outcome.

I am also flatly skeptical that there is some better solution than testing. There may be some others...but some form of testing would seem the rational answer.

How woud you ever decide your C average kid is well educated? Why you converse with him or her and judge the outcome. That is testing.

[MrBator]

I would bet that if you took away a good portion of the teacher's pay, if their students did not perform well on the tests, you would see the teachers working harder with the students who eat "sugary" foods and watch tv.