Evaluating Teachers

My mother emailed me the link to this opinion piece on evaluating teachers and the author, who changed careers to enter the teaching profession, makes some very interesting points.  Basically she says that if we're going to evaluate teachers based on testing of students then there should be some considerations made for the teachers:

  1. Teachers be assessed based on only those students with 90 percent or higher attendance.
  2. Teachers be allowed to remove disruptive students from their classroom on a day-to-day basis.
  3. Students who don't achieve "basic" proficiency in a state test be prohibited from moving forward to the next class in the progression.
  4. That teachers be assessed on student improvement, not an absolute standard — the so-called value-added assessment. 

My first reaction when I read this, especially numbers two and three, was "O-M-G if a teacher has to ask for that then our education system is truly hosed." And it's not as if the author is saying that teachers are blameless. In fact she also writes this:

Yes, some students are doing poorly because their teachers are terrible. Other students are doing poorly because they simply don't care, their parents don't care, their cognitive abilities aren't up to the task or some vicious combination of factors we haven't figured out — with no regard to teacher quality. No one is eager to discover the size of that second group, so serious testing with teeth will go nowhere.

That's too bad. We need to know how many students are failing because they don't attend class, how many students score "below basic" on the algebra test three years in a row, how many students fail all tests because they read at a fourth-grade level. We need to know if our education rhetoric is a pipe dream instead of an achievable reality blocked by those nasty teachers unions. And, of course, if it turns out that all our problems can be solved by rooting out bad teachers, we need to find that out, too.

Yep.

There’s a &%!$ing Study for Everything

Should leaders cuss?  Believe it or not, someone's done a management study on that question and as you can imagine it sounds like it was one of the more entertaining academic exercises you'll ever find:

In the most memorable scene of any academic paper I've read lately, Jenkins, after working in the packing department for a couple of months, uses nuclear-grade profanities to challenge an alpha-male co-worker, a guy named Ernest: "Well f—–g get on with it then, you lazy —-." Other workers gasped, but in fact, the incident led Jenkins to be invited to join group activities from which he'd previously been excluded. "[Jenkins] had identified the profane linguistic 'initiation rite' for inclusion in the packers' social group, and used it successfully," the authors concluded.

Meeting The People’s People

I spent the day in Raleigh meeting with state Reps and Sens for the day job and I left with a couple of general thoughts.

First, I really love the atmosphere there especially when compared to Capitol Hill. It's wide open and due to the tiny size of most offices you'll find the legislators meeting with their constituents around tables in the central common areas. And unlike the Hill you can just walk into the buildings without feeling like you're going through security at the airport. In short it's a really cool vibe.

Second, for all the reaons described above I have no idea how they actually get anything done.

Third, I'm taking my kids over there so they can see how the sausage is made. It's better than a month's worth of civics classes.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

Colonial Pipeline Tank Goes Kaboom

Anyone who lives in the Piedmont Triad is familiar with Colonial Pipeline's tank farm hard by I-40 in Greensboro.  I drive by the tanks at least twice a day during my commute to and from the office so I've had ample occasion to wonder what would happen if one caught fire.  We found out this weekend when one of them was struck by lightning and went up like a roman candle, and from what I've seen the Greensboro Fire Department did a stellar job containing the blaze.

Something interesting I learned while monitoring WXII's Kenny Beck's coverage via Twitter: one tank contains 200,000 gallons of oil, which helps put the Gulf Oil spill in perspective. If the current low end of the estimate of 42 million gallons is correct then that would be like taking 210 of those tanks and dumping them in the Gulf.