Live data from Hacker News

State's bad teachers rarely get fired

startribune.com

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#41
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the unions didn't zealously represent mediocre members, there wouldn't be any point to having them. (There might have been decades ago when management quite literally hired private armies to beat down their employees. Taking a look at the private sector, we can see that non-unionized employees are largely not beaten down by private armies and also don't come to class falling down drunk. Unions have and will contin…

Non-unionized employees can also be paid less and receive less benefits which is great. Because that's how you find the best of the best - offer next to no salary or benefits. It's so simple - you task these underpaid drones with teaching a meaningless standardized test to kids who are physically and sexually abused at home and come to school without a jacket (or breakfast or a packed lunch). If the kids don't do wel…

If standardized tests are meaningless, they should be fixed. That's a separate problem.

Also, rather than holding teachers to a standard "all students must perform as well as X", we can measure value added. Come up with a statistical predictor of how well a student will do. Then measure actual performance and evaluate teachers by (actual performance - predicted performance), averaged over all students.

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#42
post #4

Our startup (based in Seattle) was looking at ways to help analyze the performance of teachers. It turns out that the unions lobbied for legislation in Washington that forbids such software from being installed in the schools. The unions don't want mediocre teachers to be found out. It's really a crappy situation and really took us by surprise.

Did you want to install cameras or record what they were doing? Or give students feedback mechanisms or something?

I am considering a startup in this space myself.

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#43
post #4

Our startup (based in Seattle) was looking at ways to help analyze the performance of teachers. It turns out that the unions lobbied for legislation in Washington that forbids such software from being installed in the schools. The unions don't want mediocre teachers to be found out. It's really a crappy situation and really took us by surprise.

Are you going to analyze teachers performance based on their students results? If so you will be penalizing those in worse areas. And you will make teachers teach to your performance criteria. Besides how many programmers would like their value to be assessed by a piece of software?

I'm a programmer, and just started work at a hedge fund. My value and a big chunk of my pay is assessed by a piece of software (the PnL calculator). It's pretty awesome. Most entrepreneurs are assessed in a similar manner.

I think most programmers would be very happy if their performance was assessed by software, e.g. get paid for making unit tests pass. That's the holy grail of consulting: you get a spec, you build it, you get paid, no last minute changes or "this isn't what I meant".

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Besides how many programmers would like their value to be assessed by a piece of software? If I knew the criteria, I wouldn't mind, because then I could game the system.

Exactly my point..it's not going to lead to better software though is it? And teachers gaming the system won't lead to better education.

This is simply false, at least according to one controlled experiment.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://econ.ucsd.edu/~kam...

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#45
Paying people to leave actually sounds like quite a good idea to me.

Pay people 3 months salary to leave; don't pay new employees for the first 3 months.

It's much easier to identify an underperforming existing employee than to pick the best potential employee at interview. Not paying newbies filters out people who aren't motivated.

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#46
post #19
post #4

Our startup (based in Seattle) was looking at ways to help analyze the performance of teachers. It turns out that the unions lobbied for legislation in Washington that forbids such software from being installed in the schools. The unions don't want mediocre teachers to be found out. It's really a crappy situation and really took us by surprise.

yea it's unfortunate. the good thing is the current administration's Race to the Top requires states to remove protectionist laws before even being considered for the grants http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNbDv0zPBV4#t=12m

Removing the restrictions has no effect at all. Nevada, where I live and my wife teaches, changed the law to require that all teaching contracts have some type of performance based pay clause in them. The result is that the contracts for the upcoming school year offer bonuses to teachers based on performance. The requirements are poorly defined or understood. Neither the administration, teachers union or teachers understand how it will work. The general consensus is that no bonuses will be paid out, and the state will be eligible for the additional funds, for which it has already applied.

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#47
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, year to year, the ability of kids varies. While you might have a strong group one year, the next year things can be much different. Imagine the jockeying by teachers to get the best students if it meant their job or a raise. Do the less able kids get kicked the the curb because teachers are worried about getting fired?

Define "the best students." With my assumption of measurement by derivatives above, those would be the students whose knowledge changed the most during the lesson—those who knew the least before and the most after. Thus, teachers would be jockeying for the students most in need of education, not the students who already know the most (because the pretest scores would reveal that the teacher hadn't changed their knowl…

"best students" meaning those who are eager to learn and have supportive family situations. Teachers can't do it on their own.

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#48
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define "the best students." With my assumption of measurement by derivatives above, those would be the students whose knowledge changed the most during the lesson—those who knew the least before and the most after. Thus, teachers would be jockeying for the students most in need of education, not the students who already know the most (because the pretest scores would reveal that the teacher hadn't changed their knowl…

"best students" meaning those who are eager to learn and have supportive family situations. Teachers can't do it on their own.

Students who knew a lot going into 3'rd grade and still knew a lot coming out of 3'rd grade will not have a high derivative. Thus, merit based pay would reward their teacher the same as if students knew very little going into 3'rd grade and knew very little coming out.

The only way I can see to game derefr's system is to pack your class with students who used to have bad family situations, but who's family situations have recently improved. I rather doubt there are enough students in that situation to pack many classes.

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#49
post #4

Our startup (based in Seattle) was looking at ways to help analyze the performance of teachers. It turns out that the unions lobbied for legislation in Washington that forbids such software from being installed in the schools. The unions don't want mediocre teachers to be found out. It's really a crappy situation and really took us by surprise.

Did you want to install cameras or record what they were doing? Or give students feedback mechanisms or something? I am considering a startup in this space myself.

Hey, check out my reply here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1343564

Re: State's bad teachers rarely get fired

#50
post #8
post #4

Our startup (based in Seattle) was looking at ways to help analyze the performance of teachers. It turns out that the unions lobbied for legislation in Washington that forbids such software from being installed in the schools. The unions don't want mediocre teachers to be found out. It's really a crappy situation and really took us by surprise.

If the unions didn't zealously represent mediocre members, there wouldn't be any point to having them. (There might have been decades ago when management quite literally hired private armies to beat down their employees. Taking a look at the private sector, we can see that non-unionized employees are largely not beaten down by private armies and also don't come to class falling down drunk. Unions have and will contin…

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you have no actual experience with teachers unions, teachers contracts, teachers liability, or school districts in general other than your own time attending schools.

I have no love for unions in general, especially those I've had the misfortune of dealing with in the tech sector. I do however appreciate some of what the teachers union my wife is a member of provides. All teachers in our state (and most others) are required to purchase and hold liability insurance at all times. The union has negotiated rates that are over 50% less than individual rates offered by these same insurers. The union has legal representatives available to protect teachers from many different types of actions, this includes the very real threat of false accusations made by students or their parents. The school districts don't provide any of those services, and in some cases are legally prohibited from doing so as teachers are state/county employees so they fall under various laws that limit the benefits that can be offered to state workers. Teachers unions also provide representatives to mediate disputes between fellow teachers, administrators, parents, and district staff. This service can be invaluable, especially when mediating disputes between staff members and principles. Having a run in with a principle can ruin a teachers career due to the nature of how many administrations work and the good old boy system at work during hiring at many schools.

While teachers unions do use collective bargaining to negotiate contracts which include salary schedules this only has a minimum effect on most teachers. Some stellar teachers don't make as much as they might, and some mediocre teachers make more than they should. The problem is that even without the teachers union state laws often limit compensation that can be offered anyway, and at least in my state, compensation packages are done in groups or packages regardless of whether or not those workers are unionized. This means that superstar teachers wouldn't be able to get higher salaries than they do now anyway. Given that almost all state workers here are payed based on time on the job and job classification there would be very little difference. It could actually be worse given that teachers currently get more money based on their continued education in addition to years of service. This provides incentive to teachers to continue to learn and, in theory, become better teachers.

As for mediocre teachers being defended by the union, that's an unfortunate consequence of what the union offers. There are several well publicized cases of horrible or mediocre teachers being protected zealously by out of control unions or union reps. Given the total number of teachers employed, the total number of cases the unions mediate, these are the exception and not the rule. You aren't going to read about a teacher being protected by a false student accusation unless it actually goes to court. As a member of the union if there is any type of a dispute you have the right to call on the union to defend you. In most cases this is still a problem with the mediocre teacher and not the union directly. By paying those union dues the teacher gets the right to have the union step in on their behalf. In some cases you'll notice that there's a problem with public service in general. The teachers union has negotiated for contracts and rules that are unbelievable, so have the police, tech and other unions. For whatever reason people love to single out teachers unions and teachers in general.

My experience since my wife has become a teacher and I've become much more aware of what goes on at schools is that most people arguing for changes in schools have no idea what they are talking about. They have not volunteered at schools, they have not actively participated in school board meetings, they have never seen a teachers contract, they don't understand the laws that are already in place, they don't read the legislation that's pending on the state or federal level, and they don't think about or understand the consequences of the legislation they do read. There's a lot of that in the discussions about education on HN too as well.

Post reply on HN