Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've yet to find a human resources department anywhere who answered to the needs of the employee (unless they hadn't been hired yet).
I have seen human resources in various large organizations resolve conflict and deal with other employee issues effectively. In contrast, I have seen unions protect employees who are bad at their job or problematic in other ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoidberg
Criterion-referenced is not helpful; the statistics show teaching a large group of far NE heights kids will likely produce better test results than a large group of S valley kids. So why teach (or stay) at a S valley school even if you are making a bigger difference with those kids, if it's going to penalize you financially?
Norm-referenced presupposes an accurate set of peers can be established, and I submit an accurate one can not.
I agree that both of these methods are less than ideal. The reality however is that these are typically used for standardized testing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoidberg
This makes my point. You've already established three echelons of exceptions to both your test criteria. I submit that there's a wide continuum of student potential and performance and that you would have so many exceptions (particularly when you consider these different levels of kids frequently get mixed together and interact) that it'd be easier to fill out a 1040 than to come up with a teacher evaluation, fairer, and probably easier to make sense of as well.
I disagree that it would be impossible (or prohibitively difficult) to develop a relevant system of evaluation. There are certain skills / knowledge that most students in each grade should be able to achieve irrespective of home life, IQ, learning style, or other variables. If a teacher demonstrates a pattern over time of not reaching established benchmarks with a high percentage of students, or conversely, of exceeding the benchmarks, it should factor into salary increases or bonuses. I am not in favor of penalizing people with pay cuts, but I do think excellent performance should be rewarded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoidberg
When you select teachers through stringent hiring practices, or put them through intensive training they know about going in, there's going to be a fair amount of self-selection; further, both school approaches have high attrition rate for bottom-tier students. The parents may be poor but they opt in whereas less involved and poor parents don't.
Why shouldn't hiring practices for teachers be stringent? Intensive training sounds very positive as well. As for attrition rates, it would be more meaningful to draw a comparison with dropout rates in the public schools these students would otherwise attend. My guess is that there are significant dropout rates in those schools as well. There will always be students who don't finish, or who find an alternate / delayed path to finishing school.
It's safe to assume that a portion of the parents who send their children to a charter school are more involved. However there are also parents who turn to charter schools because their child has been expelled from the traditional public schools. It does not mean the parent is involved as much as it means the only other choice was for their child to not attend school at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoidberg
What makes these charter school systems successful is their lack of scalability. If they had to grow to encompass the entire pool of students and teacher candidates, odds are they wouldn't be any better than the current school systems in place.
I'm not sure about this. These schools use a very different model compared to traditional public schools. They set high expectations for students and give the students more support and individual attention. My guess is that this would produce a different (better) outcome for most students. Especially for those who lack support at home.
I am genuinely curious about your opinion of APS. Do you think it's fine the way it is? What / where / how would you suggest improvement (unless of course you believe there is no room for improvement)?
Last edited by marmom; 01-26-2012 at 10:53 AM..
Reason: Clarification
9 - Great schools
29 - Motorists to refrain from intimidating and running over bicyclists
25 - Comprehensive attack on DWIs
28 - KAFB, Sandia Labs, and others to clean up their fuel spills and toxic dumps in and around the city.
12 - Expanded Rapid Ride with later hours
I have seen human resources in various large organizations resolve conflict and deal with other employee issues effectively.
Wasn't saying that doesn't happen, only that HR does so primarily to protect the company's (or district's in this case) interests (replacing an employee is expensive), not the employee's.
Quote:
I disagree that it would be impossible (or prohibitively difficult) to develop a relevant system of evaluation.
We'll agree to disagree on that. In any case, I'd think you'd need several years worth of results to control for outside factors, which rules out teachers who haven't been teaching that long— another problem with the approach.
Quote:
Why shouldn't hiring practices for teachers be stringent? Intensive training sounds very positive as well.
Because you'll never get enough teachers to fill the jobs at the rates currently offered. You can get some, and within that some you can get better performance, but it can't scale.
Quote:
As for attrition rates, it would be more meaningful to draw a comparison with dropout rates in the public schools these students would otherwise attend.
The statistic involved disproportionately higher attrition rates of high-risk students than from public schools. Sorry for not making that clearer.
Quote:
It's safe to assume that a portion of the parents who send their children to a charter school are more involved. However there are also parents who turn to charter schools because their child has been expelled from the traditional public schools. It does not mean the parent is involved as much as it means the only other choice was for their child to not attend school at all.
Case-by-case, fine. Aggregate-wise, though, I don't think you'll end up with a 50/50 distribution; the itinerant troublemaker students are probably far fewer in number than the school-shopping parents.
Quote:
I am genuinely curious about your opinion of APS. Do you think it's fine the way it is? What / where / how would you suggest improvement (unless of course you believe there is no room for improvement)?
APS would benefit from across-the-board double-digit teacher pay hikes, along with across-the-board educational requirement hikes (i.e. teachers with less than an MA can't stay at the job more than 5 years). Both of these would require increases in property taxes, and that gets taken care of at the ballot box. The pay hikes are necessary not to compensate the existing set of teachers but to make the incoming ones better through competition.
Adding a tier of teachers whose job is to on-the-job train first- and second-year teachers by shadowing them would also dramatically improve retention and teaching quality.
Overall, though, the improvements would be modest. Some kids learn well, some kids don't, and there's a pretty small group in the middle where teachers can tip the balance.
There are a few other well-duh things that could change, like mandating lunch recess to come before lunch, rather than after (so kids actually eat their lunch and focus that afternoon instead of throw it away to go play).
Might also be interesting to vary the high school schedule such that kids in remedial classes spend more hours in school than average or top kids; many just see no value in doing their work and this would add some positive reinforcement to break that pattern.
APS would benefit from across-the-board double-digit teacher pay hikes, along with across-the-board educational requirement hikes (i.e. teachers with less than an MA can't stay at the job more than 5 years). Both of these would require increases in property taxes, and that gets taken care of at the ballot box. The pay hikes are necessary not to compensate the existing set of teachers but to make the incoming ones better through competition.
Adding a tier of teachers whose job is to on-the-job train first- and second-year teachers by shadowing them would also dramatically improve retention and teaching quality.
Overall, though, the improvements would be modest. Some kids learn well, some kids don't, and there's a pretty small group in the middle where teachers can tip the balance.
There are a few other well-duh things that could change, like mandating lunch recess to come before lunch, rather than after (so kids actually eat their lunch and focus that afternoon instead of throw it away to go play).
Might also be interesting to vary the high school schedule such that kids in remedial classes spend more hours in school than average or top kids; many just see no value in doing their work and this would add some positive reinforcement to break that pattern.
Thanks for your insights Zoidberg (even if we disagree on a few points). Definitely made me think, and rethink .
1. Tougher DWI/Crime laws.
4. In-N-Out
9. Great (better/improved)public schools.
13. See the homeless problem go away.
26. More tickets to bicyclists that don't obey the laws.
30. Less control by the Democrats.
1. Tougher DWI/Crime laws.
4. In-N-Out
9. Great (better/improved)public schools.
13. See the homeless problem go away.
26. More tickets to bicyclists that don't obey the laws.
30. Less control by the Democrats.
I'd agree with some of this - particularly In-N-Out. But, "Less control by the Democrats"?!? I'm directly involved in politics as part of my profession, and I'll just say this, - we live in a democracy. Currently, and in the past, the majority of voters in Albuquerque and NM are democrats. It's a democratic state, by and large.
However, currently we have republican mayor (due to very odd circumstances around that election), a majority republican city council (perhaps partly due to the way the districts are set up, resulting in some districts that are very democratic, and some that are barely republican), and a republican governor.
In other words, the republicans currently have control, yet they do not represent the majority of registered voters. I'm not saying I dislike all of the republicans that have power in this state currently. Some of them I like. Most of them I do not.
I'd agree with some of this - particularly In-N-Out. But, "Less control by the Democrats"?!? I'm directly involved in politics as part of my profession, and I'll just say this, - we live in a democracy. Currently, and in the past, the majority of voters in Albuquerque and NM are democrats. It's a democratic state, by and large.
However, currently we have republican mayor (due to very odd circumstances around that election), a majority republican city council (perhaps partly due to the way the districts are set up, resulting in some districts that are very democratic, and some that are barely republican), and a republican governor.
In other words, the republicans currently have control, yet they do not represent the majority of registered voters. I'm not saying I dislike all of the republicans that have power in this state currently. Some of them I like. Most of them I do not.
The tides have turned. Which I like obviously. But, it has not been that way historically. Democrats still have a very strong hand in politics locally and statewide.
What does "(due to very odd circumstances around that election)" mean?
The tides have turned. Which I like obviously. But, it has not been that way historically. Democrats still have a very strong hand in politics locally and statewide.
What does "(due to very odd circumstances around that election)" mean?
Odd circumstances because you had a three way race with two democrats that split the democratic vote - Berry got around 40% and won the election. I do not dislike Berry (I think he's doing ok), though I do not appreciate that the 5 republicans on city council have acted as obstructionists and only vote along party lines.
The tides have not turned at the voter level - democrats still hold the same strong majority among registered voters that they always have, but at the leadership level, repubs are in charge. Which is why your comments puzzled me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
