Why don't they simply make every student take a standard test and rate teachers on that?

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

 

[OldLady]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

 

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

Not the specific curriculum of Common Core or with politicized messages. However, Math, for example, is not political in nature. I believe there should be a standardized Math test.

In fact, I believe the funding of your school should be based on the previous year's median income of everyone who has ever graduated from your school.

 

[OldLady]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

Not the specific curriculum of Common Core or with politicized messages. However, Math, for example, is not political in nature. I believe there should be a standardized Math test.

In fact, I believe the funding of your school should be based on the previous year's median income of everyone who has ever graduated from your school.

There are already standardized math tests, so you're all set.

Did you just very recently start taking an interest in educational matters? Because you have some pretty uneducated ideas.

 

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

Not the specific curriculum of Common Core or with politicized messages. However, Math, for example, is not political in nature. I believe there should be a standardized Math test.

In fact, I believe the funding of your school should be based on the previous year's median income of everyone who has ever graduated from your school.

There are already standardized math tests, so you're all set.

Did you just very recently start taking an interest in educational matters? Because you have some pretty uneducated ideas.

Are teachers paid based on the test scores of their students?

 

[mgh80]

My district already does that...what's your point? It's not based on raw scores though, it's based on gains that the students make. For example having a kid score a B who usually scores a D is more progress than a student who usually scores a B and scores an A.

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

Not the specific curriculum of Common Core or with politicized messages. However, Math, for example, is not political in nature. I believe there should be a standardized Math test.

In fact, I believe the funding of your school should be based on the previous year's median income of everyone who has ever graduated from your school.

There are already standardized math tests, so you're all set.

Did you just very recently start taking an interest in educational matters? Because you have some pretty uneducated ideas.

Are teachers paid based on the test scores of their students?

We get bonuses based on the gains students make (along with evaluations from the district), so yes.

 

[RandomPoster]

My district already does that...what's your point? It's not based on raw scores though, it's based on gains that the students make. For example having a kid score a B who usually scores a D is more progress than a student who usually scores a B and scores an A.

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

Not the specific curriculum of Common Core or with politicized messages. However, Math, for example, is not political in nature. I believe there should be a standardized Math test.

In fact, I believe the funding of your school should be based on the previous year's median income of everyone who has ever graduated from your school.

There are already standardized math tests, so you're all set.

Did you just very recently start taking an interest in educational matters? Because you have some pretty uneducated ideas.

Are teachers paid based on the test scores of their students?

We get bonuses based on the gains students make (along with evaluations from the district), so yes.

Is it based on a standardized test or a subjective grade simply granted by a teacher? I'm thinking something along the lines of your students scored well on an age appropriate SAT-like test, you're a good teacher. Otherwise, you're not. Of course, they would take the test at the beginning and end and it would be based on gains like you say.

I'm reading articles saying teachers don't want standardized testing. One article even advocates basing things on teacher subjective grades! The teacher can simply give whatever grade they want.

Subjective is a dirty word when it comes to analysis.

 

[SweetSue92]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Because if your dad's in prison and your mother hung herself and now you're in your second foster care home already, and your foster care dad is abusing you, YOU CAN'T LEARN. You don't give a crap about math, your BRAIN doesn't give a crap about math. Your brain, in survival mode, does not have room for it and won't make room for it. That is brain wiring, it's neuroscience. It's brain research. Look it up if you can't believe me.

So. Is that the teacher's fault? Did he not teach math well enough for Johnny with the prison dad and the suicide mom and the abusing foster care parent to learn math?

I suppose so, because that's where we are now. It's all the teacher's fault.

 

[Natural Citizen]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Depends on who you mean by 'they'...

 

[SweetSue92]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Here's a question: why don't they do this for driver's ed?

Or do we acknowledge that there are bad drivers apart from how well they are taught?

If we do this for something like driving, why can't we do this for subjects like math, science, etc--with CHILDREN?

 

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Because if your dad's in prison and your mother hung herself and now you're in your second foster care home already, and your foster care dad is abusing you, YOU CAN'T LEARN. You don't give a crap about math, your BRAIN doesn't give a crap about math. Your brain, in survival mode, does not have room for it and won't make room for it. That is brain wiring, it's neuroscience. It's brain research. Look it up if you can't believe me.

So. Is that the teacher's fault? Did he not teach math well enough for Johnny with the prison dad and the suicide mom and the abusing foster care parent to learn math?

I suppose so, because that's where we are now. It's all the teacher's fault.

It doesn't matter who's fault it is. You simply do as much as you can with what you have to work with. It's the same with everything in life.

 

[bodecea]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

 

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

No, some are smarter than others.

 

[SweetSue92]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Because if your dad's in prison and your mother hung herself and now you're in your second foster care home already, and your foster care dad is abusing you, YOU CAN'T LEARN. You don't give a crap about math, your BRAIN doesn't give a crap about math. Your brain, in survival mode, does not have room for it and won't make room for it. That is brain wiring, it's neuroscience. It's brain research. Look it up if you can't believe me.

So. Is that the teacher's fault? Did he not teach math well enough for Johnny with the prison dad and the suicide mom and the abusing foster care parent to learn math?

I suppose so, because that's where we are now. It's all the teacher's fault.

It doesn't matter who's fault it is. You simply do as much as you can with what you have to work with. It's the same with everything in life.

But you want to blame the teacher--and possibly have him lose his job--for the fact that this student's brain neurobiology would not let him learn. REALLY?

 

[bodecea]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

The teacher could only teach the material on the test, so that would be setting the curriculum. You agree with nationalized Common Core?

Not the specific curriculum of Common Core or with politicized messages. However, Math, for example, is not political in nature. I believe there should be a standardized Math test.

In fact, I believe the funding of your school should be based on the previous year's median income of everyone who has ever graduated from your school.

There are already standardized math tests, so you're all set.

Did you just very recently start taking an interest in educational matters? Because you have some pretty uneducated ideas.

Are teachers paid based on the test scores of their students?

Are dentists paid based on the dental health of their patients?

 

[bodecea]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

No, some are smarter than others.

Is IQ the only factor?

 

[SweetSue92]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

No, some are smarter than others.

I'm not opposed, by the way, to teachers being expected to be at least competent, if not great. Do not mistake me. It's not okay to have sub-adequate teachers in our classrooms. But I don't think you measure this by output on standardized tests, because you are talking in some cases about young children coming from a variety of backgrounds who, in some situations, just CANNOT learn. No matter what the teacher does or does not do, or how competent the teacher is.

There are other methods of judging teacher competency that, when blended with student standardized test achievement over time, would give a better picture. But not a snapshot of student test achievement one year and then one year and then one year. Because there are too many learning factors at play over which the teacher has no control.

 

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

No, some are smarter than others.

I'm not opposed, by the way, to teachers being expected to be at least competent, if not great. Do not mistake me. It's not okay to have sub-adequate teachers in our classrooms. But I don't think you measure this by output on standardized tests, because you are talking in some cases about young children coming from a variety of backgrounds who, in some situations, just CANNOT learn. No matter what the teacher does or does not do, or how competent the teacher is.

There are other methods of judging teacher competency that, when blended with student standardized test achievement over time, would give a better picture. But not a snapshot of student test achievement one year and then one year and then one year. Because there are too many learning factors at play over which the teacher has no control.

They would have to create an algorithm that factored in the student's performance at the beginning of the course as well as the performance gains the student has made in the past when making an analysis based on the score. You simply have to minimize subjective analysis.

 

[SweetSue92]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

No, some are smarter than others.

I'm not opposed, by the way, to teachers being expected to be at least competent, if not great. Do not mistake me. It's not okay to have sub-adequate teachers in our classrooms. But I don't think you measure this by output on standardized tests, because you are talking in some cases about young children coming from a variety of backgrounds who, in some situations, just CANNOT learn. No matter what the teacher does or does not do, or how competent the teacher is.

There are other methods of judging teacher competency that, when blended with student standardized test achievement over time, would give a better picture. But not a snapshot of student test achievement one year and then one year and then one year. Because there are too many learning factors at play over which the teacher has no control.

They would have to create an algorithm that factored in the student's performance at the beginning of the course as well as the performance gains the student has made in the past when making an analysis based on the score. You simply have to minimize subjective analysis.

How would that precious "algorithm" factor in that the student has newly lost his home because his father is in prison, his mother has committed suicide and he is in foster homes now?

You realize humans are not widgets, right, and none of how we respond to anything is "simply"????

 

[RandomPoster]

If they test students at the beginning of the course and the end of the course, they could objectively evaluate how good each teacher is. Anyone who argues against the practice is against objective analysis of teachers.

Of course...students are widgets....they all respond exactly the same to instruction.

No, some are smarter than others.

I'm not opposed, by the way, to teachers being expected to be at least competent, if not great. Do not mistake me. It's not okay to have sub-adequate teachers in our classrooms. But I don't think you measure this by output on standardized tests, because you are talking in some cases about young children coming from a variety of backgrounds who, in some situations, just CANNOT learn. No matter what the teacher does or does not do, or how competent the teacher is.

There are other methods of judging teacher competency that, when blended with student standardized test achievement over time, would give a better picture. But not a snapshot of student test achievement one year and then one year and then one year. Because there are too many learning factors at play over which the teacher has no control.

They would have to create an algorithm that factored in the student's performance at the beginning of the course as well as the performance gains the student has made in the past when making an analysis based on the score. You simply have to minimize subjective analysis.

How would that precious "algorithm" factor in that the student has newly lost his home because his father is in prison, his mother has committed suicide and he is in foster homes now?

You realize humans are not widgets, right, and none of how we respond to anything is "simply"????

That one student may score low despite the teacher's best efforts, except he's not going to cause the entire class to score low.