Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
That is a gross misrepresentation of what they do. We've all been taught by plenty of teachers who knew their shit and did exactly as you say and they were terrible teachers. And we've all been taught by teachers that change our lives.
I don't know what's so hard about this. We all know the difference between good and bad teaching, yet can't acknowledge that it's talent that sets good and bad ones apart?
A good part of it is the proposals for assessing quality teaching. Currently there are proposals that would "rate" teachers on their students' standardized test scores. At first glance that seems reasonable, however the vast majority of these plans fail to take into account where those students stood when they entered the classroom.
Students in honors courses for example, many of whom may be able to score high at the beginning of the year take a test and by the measure of a standardized test we assume the teacher was great. Another teacher has a kid who can't multiply without using his fingers, he makes huge progress conceptually yet fails the year end test. That teacher is assumed to be a failure.
The kind of assessments to truly evaluate instructional practices are woefully lacking funds. When you can't even classroom needs fulfilled in many districts spending money on those truly performance assessments that can measure growth stand little to no chance of gaining support. It is just easier to rant about the crappy, lazy teachers (and there are some).
Pay for performance, great, if you are truly awarding performance and not fortunate circumstance.