Thread: Education discussion... Not content specific.

How about if we use the "Other Subject-Related Forum" that's a few rows above this one? I know the description doesn't quite fit, but that's what I've thought of as part of its purpose.

No one had an opinion on that quote?

Originally Posted by duct.tape

"Successful schools are characterized by leaders who support and encourage teacher growth and development, but who also have the courage to remove poor teachers when support efforts fail." (Johnson & Uline, 2005)

Anyone with an opinion?

I would say that's true as long as they are removed because they really are poor teachers who could not or would not improve. Politics should never be involved.

It's discouraging to the hard working teachers when some just slip by with so little effort. Many times the poor teachers add to everyone else's burden. A good principal should get rid of the deadwood.

Well, obviously I read the first paragraph and skimmed (poorly) the rest. My apologies.

I agree that poor teachers need to be removed. Good administrators need to have the guts to do what needs to be done. Poor teachers may make the good teachers look good, but it's not worth the burden that they impose.

The problem is not getting rid of the bad teachers, but poor administrators who either won't get rid of them or worse yet don't recognize them. In those cases we are stuck with poor teachers and poor administrators.

Unions are such a scapegoat for the this sort of thing--but in reality, yes, the administration is a big part of the problem. I think very often the reason they don't act is, perhaps besides not wanting the hassle, they are on an upwards climb to senior admin, superintendents, politicians...etc. And they don't want anything to spoil the polish on their apple, so to speak.

I am weary of administration that is gutless, just as I am tired of being abused by parents (see: gutless administrators) and useless teachers taking up air until they can retire (not ALL close-to-retirement teachers, not by a long chalk, but some).

Sometimes doing what is right is not doing what's easy. In fact rarely.

Lisa

The premise is sound. However in practice it would never work. The problem will be ensuring that the person who will make the evaluation of the teachers is a "good" administrator. There are too many admins out there who wouldn't know a good or poor teacher if they tripped over one.

This quote just makes me think of all the poor teachers I have known during my 30 years in education that have been promoted to administrators......

I'm not consistently a good teacher- I'm working on it though. If somebody has a long learning curve, as I suspect I might, then that soul may not have a chance to get any better- and people are not breaking down the doors to be teachers. In this day and age, you are expected to be every bit the 30 year veteran right out of student teaching. My problem with that statement is that I have seen someone I knew with no uncertainty to be a good teacher removed (thanks to skill with bureaucracy) for disagreeing with a principal on another teacher's self-assumption of leadership. (One of the teachers crowned herself "Queen of the 7th Grade"). Would anything less than perfect performance be tolerated? (We certainly tolerate less than perfect performances by our students) Would "office politics" not play a factor? Would it be likely that the bad ones would be replaced by the good ones? Ideally, all teachers would be the best possible ones, the ones with great experiences, the ones with impeccable classroom management skills, the ones who spend long hours working with kids after school. I think I agree with the following most though:

The problem will be ensuring that the person who will make the evaluation of the teachers is a "good" administrator. There are too many admins out there who wouldn't know a good or poor teacher if they tripped over one.