Still Hating America.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Why give the administrators the power? Why not let the tests do the talking? Without the annual tests how will the administrators know what teachers are not doing their job? And once they have the tests you don't need the administrators to make subjective decisions. You can use objective standards.

The test is not a measure of teacher performance, though that is surely one factor that goes into the scores. But there are others. How do you sort them out, if not subjectively?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The test is not a measure of teacher performance, though that is surely one factor that goes into the scores. But there are others. How do you sort them out, if not subjectively?

That is its main purpose. If you test the students at the end of the year, and compare their scores to the previous year, you know how well the teacher did. Is the teacher there to do something else other than to teach reading, writing and basic math? If not, then what could be more objective than that? What other factors are there to consider?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is its main purpose. If you test the students at the end of the year, and compare their scores to the previous year, you know how well the teacher did. Is the teacher there to do something else other than to teach reading, writing and basic math? If not, then what could be more objective than that? What other factors are there to consider?

Can you really not think of things that would affect scores other than a teachers' performance? See, e.g., the list here. Hard for individual teachers to do much about most of those factors.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is its main purpose. If you test the students at the end of the year, and compare their scores to the previous year, you know how well the teacher did. Is the teacher there to do something else other than to teach reading, writing and basic math? If not, then what could be more objective than that? What other factors are there to consider?

Damn. I had a long, kumbaya-like post about how we could have gotten along better, but the damn computer just ate it and I don't have the energy to re-write it.

So you will just get the end, which was to say that I don't disagree with everything you say. Testing can help measure teacher performance. Schools should be able to fire bad teachers. Social promotion should be a rare exception rather than the norm.

But I don't agree with you that any of what you say is absolute good with no countervaling considerations. And I don't agree that your three points are the main obsticles to effective education. Nor do I agree that teacher unions are the main problem facing schools because they disagree with you.

My point here is that we could have had a much more meaningful discussion about this had you not begun (and continued it) with the quotes above. And you would have sounded decidedly less like a partisan hack.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Can you really not think of things that would affect scores other than a teachers' performance? See, e.g., the list here. Hard for individual teachers to do much about most of those factors.

Were you not reading what I wrote? Yes, some things effect the overall scores, but you are looking at the difference between the previous year's test and this year's test. In addition, you would know what sort of improvement to expect because you would have similar test scores from similar classes in similar neighborhoods.

Other teachers would be teaching the same type of class in the same school or in other schools, so you would compare the teacher's performance. Obviously, in the class where the teachers had other factors helping them with the education (like parent involement) you would expect better test scores. But you would now what kind of progress you would expect in certain types of classes by how their peers perform.

What other criteria (besides improvement in test scores as compared to classes in similar situations) could you use to determine if the teacher was doing their job?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Adder
Damn. I had a long, kumbaya-like post about how we could have gotten along better, but the damn computer just ate it and I don't have the energy to re-write it.

I can totally relate. And to add insult to injury, not only did you lose something that you spent a lot time on, you can't even bill for it.

Originally posted by Adder So you will just get the end, which was to say that I don't disagree with everything you say. Testing can help measure teacher performance. Schools should be able to fire bad teachers. Social promotion should be a rare exception rather than the norm.

Kumbaya

Originally posted by Adder But I don't agree with you that any of what you say is absolute good with no countervaling considerations.

Then how would you approach the drafting of state legislation that would attempt to create tests to determine teacher performance, that would make social promotion rare, and to help schools get rid of bad teachers?

Originally posted by Adder
And I don't agree that your three points are the main obsticles to effective education.

What factors do you think are the main obstacles to effective education and how would you address the problems through state legislation?

Originally posted by Adder
Nor do I agree that teacher unions are the main problem facing schools because they disagree with you.

Do you think the lobbyists from the teachers unions would agree with the statement; "Testing can help measure teacher performance, Schools should be able to fire bad teachers, and Social promotion should be a rare exception rather than the norm." And do you think they would support legislation that would make this concept become a practical reality?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Were you not reading what I wrote? Yes, some things effect the overall scores, but you are looking at the difference between the previous year's test and this year's test. In addition, you would know what sort of improvement to expect because you would have similar test scores from similar classes in similar neighborhoods.

Other teachers would be teaching the same type of class in the same school or in other schools, so you would compare the teacher's performance. Obviously, in the class where the teachers had other factors helping them with the education (like parent involement) you would expect better test scores. But you would now what kind of progress you would expect in certain types of classes by how their peers perform.

You might, but you might not. Many of those factors (that I linked to) could change from year to year. Many have to do with decisions made by a school's administration, rather than a teacher. You can see how administrators might prefer to can teachers rather than admit a screw-up, but that doesn't mean it'll work for students.

What other criteria (besides improvement in test scores as compared to classes in similar situations) could you use to determine if the teacher was doing their job?

Many, many posts ago, I made the point that it is very difficult to tell whether teachers are doing their jobs well. I continue to believe that's the case. There aren't good objective criteria to use. To do it well takes a lot of work and a subjective evaluation. I don't really trust the public-school administrators I've known to do this well.

It's just a problem with no good answers. It's the nature of the beast.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Adder
Yes, strangely I did not get the memo from the RNC that would have enlightened me.

We did have an argument about one thing. When Wilson was governor here he pushed really hard to reduce class sizes. I think he made the absolute limit of a class size in K-12 either 25 or 30 kids. When he did it it caused huge trauma in the school system (they had to go on a massive teaching hiring binge and it was also really expensive) Anyway, they were planning on pushing the limit up through Junior High and High School. But Davis (the next govenor) never followed through with that. Evers said they didn't follow through because there was no evidence that the smaller class size improved education and so resources were being put elsewhere.

I thought that was wrong. If the stats showed that reducing class size didn't improve things, then something was wrong with the stats. I just couldn't believe that the reduction in class size wouldn't help and thought they should continue the policy in Junior High and High School.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
I thought that was wrong. If the stats showed that reducing class size didn't improve things, then something was wrong with the stats. I just couldn't believe that the reduction in class size wouldn't help and thought they should continue the policy in Junior High and High School.

I hear what you're saying. OTOH, maybe the same $$$ could have been spent on something with even more bang for the buck (even smaller class sizes for lower grades?). OTOH again, maybe Davis squandered it on the prison guards.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Many of those factors (that I linked to) could change from year to year.

For example? And wouldn't those factors that even change year to year stay constant for all the classes in a particular school so you could see which teacher's in that school were doing well as compared to their peers in the same school?

In addition, school principles could also be compared. You could see how the overall school was doing compared to schools in other neighborhoods. Or how well the pricnple was doing compared to his predecessor.

In a management course I took in my MBA program, the professor (who was an executive from Motoralls) told us that if you can't figure out who in your organization is doing a good job, eventually no one will be doing a good job.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I hear what you're saying. OTOH, maybe the same $$$ could have been spent on something with even more bang for the buck (even smaller class sizes for lower grades?). OTOH again, maybe Davis squandered it on the prison guards.

This guy wouldn't defend Davis unless he deserved it. I really think that the stats showed that. I wouldn't mind if they spent the money on smaller classes for the lower grades but the conventional wisdom was that smaller classes did not help at all so there is absolutely no more effort to make the classes smaller anywhere.

Not only did Davis spend a lot of money on the prison guards (I remember that they can retire at some ridiculous age like 40 with almost full benefits), but a prison guard in California can practically get away with murder. I don't agree with the ACLU on a lot of things, but they are right when it comes to situation in California prisons. I heard a prison nurse testify about the abuse and it was unbelievable.

The other problem with the prison guards is that the Republicans by ideology are unsympathetic about what happens to the prisoners in California, so they won't stand up to the guards, and the Democrats are sympathetic to unions, so they won't stand up to the union. And then they donate millions to everybody's campaigns.

If you are going to commit a felony, do it somewhere besides Cali.

[Spanky]

Lets just provide strategy options for the insurgents...


McCain Fears 'Tet Offensive' in Iraq

Feb 12 6:07 PM US/Eastern


By BOB LEWIS
Associated Press Writer


RICHMOND, Va. (AP) -- Republican presidential hopeful John McCain said Monday he fears an offensive by Iraqi insurgents similar to the Tet offensive by the Viet Cong that sent U.S. casualties soaring in Vietnam nearly 40 years ago.
McCain, a Vietnam war veteran who spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war, said in an interview with The Associated Press that it's not the U.S. presence in Iraq that upsets voters but rather the number of casualties and the possibility those numbers could rise.



The U.S. death toll is more than 3,100 in the nearly four-year-old war.

In the GOP presidential field, McCain is one of the strongest proponents of President Bush's plan to increase the number of U.S. troops in Iraq by some 21,500.

"By the way, a lot of us are also very concerned about the possibility of a, quote, 'Tet Offensive.' You know, some large-scale tact that could then switch American public opinion the way that the Tet Offensive did," the Arizona senator said.

Last month, an Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that 62 percent said the United States made a mistake in going to war in Iraq.

McCain made his comment in explaining why he did not believe the Bush administration should set a date by which it should deem Bush's troop increase a success or a failure.

"I think that it should be publicly open-ended because I think that if you set a date, that there's every possibility that the insurgents would just lay back and wait until we leave," McCain said.

Tet, a massive invasion in 1968 of South Vietnam by Communist North Vietnamese, inflicted enormous losses on U.S. and South Vietnamese troops and is regarded as a point where public sentiment turned sharply against the war.

McCain was in Richmond to address about 40 Virginia Republicans who could potentially support his 2008 presidential bid.

McCain said that while U.S. intelligence in the Middle East is better than the flawed information available before the 2003 Iraq invasion, it's still lacking as Iran continues its efforts to process nuclear material.

He said he has no doubt Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

"It is in my opinion that it is not whether they are developing nuclear weapons but when, and there is where opinion varies. Some say as short a time as two years, others as many as 10," McCain said.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
For example? And wouldn't those factors that even change year to year stay constant for all the classes in a particular school so you could see which teacher's in that school were doing well as compared to their peers in the same school?

For example, one of those bullets had to do with IT. Maybe the administration spends its budget on new computers for K-2, but higher grades have to use older stuff that doesn't work. Use a little imagination and you'll see that there are all sorts of things beyond an individual teacher's control.

In addition, school principles could also be compared. You could see how the overall school was doing compared to schools in other neighborhoods. Or how well the pricnple was doing compared to his predecessor.

OK. So who do you fire? The principal? Everyone?

In a management course I took in my MBA program, the professor (who was an executive from Motoralls) told us that if you can't figure out who in your organization is doing a good job, eventually no one will be doing a good job.

That sounds great in the business world. If that worked in education, maybe it would be a business instead of a government-provided service.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is its main purpose. If you test the students at the end of the year, and compare their scores to the previous year, you know how well the teacher did. Is the teacher there to do something else other than to teach reading, writing and basic math? If not, then what could be more objective than that? What other factors are there to consider?

FWIW, I'd never ever compare a teacher's 2005 class at Westbury High School in Houston, Texas against the 2006 class. Katrina had an effect on other places than New Orleans.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
For example, one of those bullets had to do with IT. Maybe the administration spends its budget on new computers for K-2, but higher grades have to use older stuff that doesn't work. Use a little imagination and you'll see that there are all sorts of things beyond an individual teacher's control.

You are blowing this stuff way out of proportion. I can imagine that it may not make it to work tomorrow because I may get hit by a car (or imagine many other things), but how probable is it? How much of a boost in education is a computer going to make for one year in a students life when it comes to basic math and reading. Teachers taught this stuff for years without computers. Yes a computer might help a little, but don't you think the effectiveness of the teacher will be signficantly more determinant in what the student will learn. And if computers are given out to all the K-2 classes, then the grades can be compared to classes that get them. And you won't get new conputers every year so if there was a spike because of computers that year, all the other years won't have that same spike. Schools don't change that much every year, and the teacher is the biggest factor that changes.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
OK. So who do you fire? The principal? Everyone?

People wonder why I repeat myself, but I keep getting asked the same question. You look for patterns over time. You move a principle around, and if schools keep performing less well after he is put in you know he is bad principle. Just like with teachers you don't go with just one year. But over the years you will see which teachers consistenly out do their collegues and which ones don't.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
That sounds great in the business world. If that worked in education, maybe it would be a business instead of a government-provided service.

So whatever works in Business doesn't work in education because education is not a busines. That is absurd. What makes running a school so different from running a successful business that would make this one factor so different? Yes, in one your goal is not profits, but in both you have a goal and you want people that help you achieve that goal. In a company you want people that help you make good widgets efficiently and in a school you want people that will help you effectively teach students. This need of identifying which employees are helping you achieve your goal would seem to apply to both situations. Are you saying it wouldn't be helpful, or would have no effect, to be able to determine which teachers are using the tools given them more effectively than others in their goal of providing an education for children?