(snip)...
>What makes us somewhat difference from other corporations is that we do
>have lifetime employees, that we have no measurable product, and our
>customers and out product are the same: students! For those thinking the
>perspective should be that of service, that is true, too, however our
>customers again are unique - no two alike. And unlike medicine and other
>individualized services, what works for one does not for another.
>
>The real issue is that teachers argue rightfully so that there is no
>objective measure to assess their performance which could be consistent
>across 30 schools and hundreds of supervisors with varying degrees of
>expertise. And, rightfully so, student achievement over an 8 month period
>is neither measurable nor a measure of that teacher's performance.
Funny, I don't know how to quantitatively measure my barber. But if I
don't like her work I'll go elsewhere. As a parent I would love that
option when selecting my child's public school teacher. The primary
aspect of US k-12 public education is that in many states the local
teacher's unions are a closed shop, providing lifetime employment in
school systems that have a publicly funded, franchise monopoly.
Measure teachers? Talk to the parents on the bus stop. Very quickly
you'll discover general agreement on three groups of teachers. One group
rated high by most everyone; an OK group perceived to serve some kids
better than others; a group that is uniformly considered weak to
egregious. And, if you test these views with the professional staff in
the school you'll usually get similar groupings. But, if the egregious
teachers have tenure (in New Jersey at least) they will continue
"teaching". And the NJEA (their Union) will fight like hell against any
effort to have them dismissed.
Not only is it essentially impossible to rid schools of the egregious
teachers, few schools have systematic processes in place to improve system
performance. For example, few have a systematic process to collect data
on how parents, students and teachers perceive the school's performance,
let alone to act on that data.
And even fewer public school systems have systematic processes to collect
such data at the individual teacher level. At the end of the year ask a
teacher "Did your teaching improve this year?" And, "How do you know?"
While the better ones may be able to provide a coherent answer, most of
these will be in terms of what they did, rather than student outcomes.
I'm not in favor of merit pay for teachers. (I think merit pay has been
overuse in industry, it is the HR analogue to competing on price for
employees commitment and behavior). But I do get tired of how often the
teachers (and their unions) point to student uniqueness to resist the
systematic collection of performance indicators (including parental and
student satisfaction surveys).
Doug Merchant <dougm@eclipse.net)
Currently On Career Sabbatical
--"Doug Merchant" <dougm@eclipse.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>