« Meet the Teachers' Union Contract of the Future | Main | The Drawbacks of a Technophobic Education »

October 19, 2011

Comments

Is there any data on how many teachers rated highly effective or effective are rated minimally effective or ineffective the next year? The change from one category, ie that "D.C. teachers rated "minimally effective" who stay in the district have a decent chance of improving under IMPACT" might simply be a function of random variation. In fact, the DFER report says that of those "Returning Teachers Rated Minimally Effective in 2009-2010, 58% Improved in 2010-2011" which might just as well show the unreliability of the metric. Have you also considered the possibility that those teachers rated ineffective and immediately terminated might also have been good teachers, given how erratic test scores are from year to year?

Churn and burn is the point: a transient, powerless, at-will work force is precisely what the Rhees of the world want, despite their marketing of themselves as advocates for students. Control and domination of the profession, both in terms of teacher training and labor relations, is a cornerstone of corporate ed reform.

By encouraging high teacher turnover, they intend to eliminate all institutional memory of a traditional, democratically-run public school system, and replace it with the monetized, top heavy, high throughput(in that they maximize the never-ending use of foundations, private and university-based consultants, institutes, networks, coaches and all the other quasi-parasitical appendages to the schools)system that we see in cities like New York and Chicago.

By the way, it might be helpful if you indentified DFER as the politically-juiced advocacy organization it is.

The comments to this entry are closed.