|
|
DM wrote:
"...We cannot wait
any longer for action to change a situation where white students are greatly over-represented, and students of color greatly
under-represented, in regular education programs with low teacher turnover rates and the lion's share of the district's more
experienced teachers."
TI wrotes:
What are some ways in which this problem can be addressed?
DM writes:
What I advocate is a quality education accessible to all students
on an equal basis by making all of the district-run
schools good
schools. Toward that end we need to take steps to equalize
educational inputs, especially in the area
of teacher
expertise, reduce teacher turnover rates, and stabilize
the staffing situation at all schools. In addition,
we
should phase out curriculum tracks for "low-ability" learners
and integrate the general student population into
"gifted
and talented" programs.
Below are three key reforms
TEACHER TURNOVER
A revolving door for low seniority
teachers saves the district
10s of millions of dollars per year in teacher payroll expenses.
That's why the district
administration, with board approval, has
been sending layoff notices to many teachers between April 1
and June 30 it
obviously plans to recall or replace before students
return for classes in the fall. Unless they give notice by April 1
or get a
layoff notice, teachers may not take a teaching job with another
district. And teachers are very strongly
motivated to look for
another job unless they are certain their employment with the
district will continue.
EQUALIZING
EDUCATIONAL INPUTS
I advocate setting aside "teacher in training" positions for
newly-hired, inexperienced teachers
in all schools, which
they would hold until they complete their 5th year of
employment with the district. Then they
would have to bid
for regular positions that become available. Teachers
with more than 5 years of current experience
at time of
hire would be assigned directly to a "regular" position.
PHASE OUT CURRICULUM TRACKING
In addition,
we should begin to phase out curriculum tracks
for 'low-ability learners," and integrate the general student
population
into college-bound classes. Curriculum tracking
is done on at least a part-time basis in K-3 classrooms
for reading
instruction. Differences in average achievement
levels between high and low ability classes generally
increases, even
though "closing the gap" is an educational
justification for this practice. In my opinion, teachers could
better accommodate
individual differences in learning abilities
by utilizing approaches for the general student population that
are recommended
for "gifted and talented students," such as
basing instruction on a college bound curriculum, curriculum
enrichment,
and individualized assessments, planning, and
evaluation. It ordinarily takes a teacher several years to learn
to do
that kind of teaching very well.
|
|
|