Still, the union’s wagon-circling response curries them no favor with me or the rest of the Democratic Party which is splintering alongside its plank on organized labor.

Which is weird, ’cause union prez George Parker sounds utterly lucid on the next evolution of the teacher’s union in this interview with the National Council on Teacher Quality:

[The hemorrhaging of DC students from public schools to charters] puts the union in a different light. It’s not just the contract that protects jobs but also student enrollment. We are expanding our professional development because that impacts student achievement and if parents perceive we improve student achievement then we stand a better chance of getting students back who moved to charter schools. The more students we have, the more teachers we can employ, and the more security we can develop in terms of jobs.

Outside of that, I still think an overhaul to the whole way we approach PD is in order. Give us meaningful time and tools to improve instruction. Treat this like the demanding profession it truly is, when done well. Assume there is a one best way to teach anything – and find it, refine it, publish it, review it periodically, and (cue the screams of rage) expect people to do it that way.

I wouldn’t be against that kind of system — that gets the relationship between the state and local levels right. After you lose your job, you might lose your license.

I can, however, see the subsequent post on The Quick and the Ed:

Pennsylvania’s year old system for de-certifying teachers has rooted out… 8 incompetent teachers in the whole state. Problem solved!

The underlying problem is that no matter what the rules, principals have to carefully weigh how much time, energy and political capital they want to devote to getting rid of lousy teachers. Raising the stakes by adding decertification to the mix will only increase the pressure to not try to get rid of a teacher. I just don’t see more bureacracy solving the problem.

Is there a way in PA to get a record of where applicants have taught before without relying on the applicant’s references? Wouldn’t something like that be sufficient and less intrusive?

Michelle,

Actually, there is a similar system here in Rhode Island, and having experienced it, I can’t really imagine using it to weed out bad teachers. It is more busy work than evaluation. But you either need something like that, or test scores. Or you’re elevating issues like Chris describes, but I think Dan’s concern is that these things aren’t being handled locally in the first place.

If the administrator evaluating ALL FORTY-TWO criteria in said portfolio (and having to go through ALL FORTY-TWO for EVERY faculty member) doesn’t really take the time to thoroughly examine each artifact and discuss it’s worthiness, what’s gained? A waste of time for teachers who are already constantly searching to improve, and a portfolio full of BS from those just doing it to get it done and trying to get it done by 3:45 so they can get out of the building.

I feel your pain and frustration (wrote a blog about aliterate [able to read, but chosing not to] teachers that TEACH READING!–Can’t believe that is happening all over the country!!). What I’m wondering is what can we do to erradicate those half-hearted teachers BEFORE they get their license? How did those people even GET a license to work with young people in the FIRST place? What can we do to make sure those applying for the license are truly qualified??

Hmmm… Seems to me to be more a problem of humanity, than just of education.

I’ve seen some teachers in schools that had no business teaching kids. And the problem is that in many cases, they bounce from school to school… often time from bad school to worse school until they either find a place where they aren’t the worst problem or they find an admin who is so overwhelmed that they can’t find a way (or the time) to get rid of them.

Every school has a way to rate a teacher unsatisfactory, which then has a long review process. Perhaps there should be a trigger for every teacher who is removed from a school for unsatisfactory performance, such that there is an investigation of whether or not the offense was so egregious as to make them lose their license with the state.

@Jason, fine, I’m interested in hearing you consider them separately.

I can’t believe how quickly I turn into my neocon parents on this one.

I hence consider coming up with an incentive for good teaching and a disincentive for lousy teaching a separate issue.

@ddmeyer we’ve got to train & recruit teachers & education leaders who think about teaching as public service & not just as a “job.”

In practice, anywhere other than possibly DC, to have the state try to determine which teachers are or are not competent or effective on an ongoing basis would be an expensive disaster. Whether it is desirable in principle is irrelevant. The processes you’d like to see need to be implemented locally, not at the state level.