The problem, of course, isn’t that the federal government is trying to improve public education nor is it the five billion dollars in available grant funds. It’s the strings that the government is attaching to those funds. Yesterday’s Hartford Courant ran an article by Grace Merrit that discusses the State Board of Education’s first meeting to begin grappling with Connecticut’s application for funds from the Race competition. Merrit’s article points out that “To be eligible for [funds], applicants must prove that performance assessments for teachers and school administrators are linked to student and school performance.†This will have to entail the evaluation of teachers, and this will most likely result in some form of merit pay for teachers tied directly to student performance, and we all know that such performance will be measured not by grades but by standardized test scores. The short-hand version is that, for schools to get federal funds, teachers will have to raise CAPT and CMT scores. Or, to paraphrase State Board Vice Chairwoman Janet Finneran, we will have to sell our souls and abandon our teaching philosophies.
I can’t help but think about merit at UConn. I know I have written about this before, and it’s dull to go into detail, but suffice to say that it is one of the most contentious subjects at our department meetings. Professors end up quibbling about whether or not administrative work (like running a writing program!) is equivalent to the publication of scholarship. They quibble over the relative merits of a poem compared to a scholarly essay. There is concern that the process is too subjective. And really, the money is paltry, maybe a few hundred dollars. It’s not that. It’s that people work hard and they get upset when a committee of their peers gives them a modest merit rating. It’s like the tale of the boy who writes an essay on his grandmother and gets a C+. He walks away not so much upset about the grade as he is upset about the fact that you just told him he has a C+ grandmother.
Well, the good news about this (and I am being completely sarcastic here) is that if you teach in the suburbs you’ll dodge the bullet, at least this time around. Your district won’t be getting any of that Race to the Top money the state receives and you won’t have to deal with teacher evaluations, either. The state is targeting twenty urban school districts for these funds (and the necessary teacher assessment component). They are Hartford, East Hartford, Manchester, Bloomfield, New Britain, Bristol, Middletown, Meriden, Ansonia, Bridgeport, Danbury, Hamden, Naugatuck, New Haven, New London, Norwalk, Stamford, Waterbury, West Haven, Windham, and the Technical High School System. As I write the names of these towns I picture teachers I know from each district and their various reactions of fear, anger, disbelief, and resignation.
As I was processing my own emotional responses to this, I was thinking about how hard if not impossible it is to devise a fair and accurate assessment system for teachers. And I was thinking about another article I had read in the Courant a couple weeks before, by James Starr and Mayra Esquilin. They were writing about how successful Hartford’s schools have been in the wake of reorganization and reform efforts throughout the district. Starr and Esquilin point out that CMT scores have climbed by 25% since 2007, and graduation rates are up to 42%. (They don’t say it in the article, but graduation rates were below 30% just a few years ago). This is wonderful and encouraging news. But just two days later a letter to the editor ran that lambasted Hartford teachers and administrators for graduating only 42% of their students. Can you imagine the public outcry if those teachers and administrators received merit pay when only 42% of Hartford’s students were graduating? Conversely, can you imagine the discouragement and anger among teachers if after achieving such improvement they received no merit recognition?
It’s simply a Catch-22. And really, as much as we’d all like to be paid better, I suspect it wouldn’t really be about the money for the teachers. Honestly, once those federal funds trickled their way down to the teachers they’d never get much anyway. It’s about being recognized for our hard work. Most of us, I suspect, would be damn happy with a letter from our administration praising our good work, or a prominent article in the Courant or elsewhere reporting positively on our meritorious efforts.
No comments:
Post a Comment