Honestly, I don’t think I’ve heard the former all that much
I’ve usually heard it in the context of teachers bristling at any notion that they should be graded on the results that they achieve, in their jobs.
When someone suggests ANY level of accountability, based on outcomes, the teachers will start screaming and crying, about how there’s nothing that they could do any differently, they’re already doing their best, and nothing is their fault. So it would be incredibly unfair and downright villainous to even consider evaluating their job performance.
Well, if that’s the case, then it shouldn’t be possible to buy better results. ARE they holding back and underperforming, as a form of industrial action? If so, that’s kind of a dick move, from the perspective of the kids that are being under-taught. Also, if that’s what they’re doing, then they need to be more direct in explaining the situation.
If they literally said “we COULD do better, but you pay us like shit, so we’re not really trying. You get what you pay for,” I would respect that.
But nobody wants to say that. They want to be regarded as valiant, heroic martyrs, constantly struggling to do their absolute best, but ALSO they would totally take that extra green, if someone offered it.
You know, and I know this is completely anecdotal, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen people use a description like that except when they’re trying to dismiss the opinions of others. It puts the complaint on an emotional level rather than a rational one, as though it’s not worth consideration.
One can also do their best, but still not be up to par simply because they don’t have the resources available. If the teacher/student ratios are too high, so they can’t address all issues necessary. If they don’t have the physical resources available to provide adequate education, out-of-date or just poorly made textbooks, or the resources they do have are politicized to the degree that they can only teach misinformation without risking their job.
And I think our experience with standardization is a perfect example for why they might be reticent to accept evaluations as a way to determine effectiveness. If those evaluations don’t take into account the previous things I mentioned, talented and capable teachers may get the axe through no fault of their own.
Not to mention… maybe you’re just seeing a vocal minority. Of people who aren’t capable and just don’t want to lose their safe job. That doesn’t necessarily reflect teachers as a whole.
And finally… while we are a capitalist society, and thus money is the (no longer) gold standard by which we measure success… just throwing money at something doesn’t necessarily fix it. It needs to go hand in hand with proper procedures, regulations, and a flexibility of contextual awareness over global standardization. Yes, money will help, but it’s no where near the only thing. It’s just the easiest to look at and say “We did a thing!” and “The thing doesn’t work, it’s someone else’s fault now!”
If the teacher/student ratios are too high, so they can’t address all issues necessary. If they don’t have the physical resources available to provide adequate education, out-of-date or just poorly made textbooks, or the resources they do have are politicized to the degree that they can only teach misinformation without risking their job.
This is where the argument always shifts. But it STARTS with “I personally need a bigger salary.”
And I don’t even disagree. Teachers should be making at LEAST twice the money they make. Take the money from the fucking sports programs at the state colleges and funnel that shit directly to the workaday teachers. But I think it’s weird that you try to wriggle away from the discussion about actual teacher pay. Be open about it. It seems weird, otherwise.
why they might be reticent to accept evaluations as a way to determine effectiveness
You mean like literally every other job? There are basically four jobs in modern, industrialized society, where you’re able to skate by and never be evaluated on your effectiveness: cops, nurses, politicians, and teachers. And all four of those groups are CONSTANTLY HANGING THEMSELVES UP ON THEIR CROSSES OF MARTYRDOM, BECAUSE “OOOOOHHH, NOOOOO, THE PEOPLE DON’T ACCEPT OUR EXCUSES FOR BEING SHITTY, EVEN WHEN WE’RE SHITTY!”
Not that we, the rest of the people can actually DO anything about it. You can’t get any of the people in those protected groups fired, for basically any performance-related reason.
As a person who has only ever been on the receiving end of nursing, law enforcement, politics, and teaching, believe me: I have encountered plenty of shitty people in all those professions. But none of the people who actually work in those categories are ever subjected to the kind of performance-based, results-based evaluations that all the rest of us simply have to expect, in our lives.
Every other job involves results-based performance reviews. If you get bad results, you can get demoted, get penalized, or get fired. Even if you have reasonable excuses for your failures. The only exception would be if you work for yourself, and then you’re subject to the market itself. If you do a shitty job, people won’t want to use your products or services.
But, again, if you’re a cop, a nurse, a teacher, or a politician, you don’t have to worry. As long as you play the politics correctly, your failures don’t matter. You’ll be shielded from them, as long as you’re in good standing with your peers.
I’m not happy about that, and I don’t think I should be.
Every other job involves results-based performance reviews. If you get bad results, you can get demoted, get penalized, or get fired.
And those metrics are also often bullshit made up by middle managers to make themselves look good.
I dont disagree that we should hold basic services like that to a higher standard… but especially with teachers (and nurses) they need a hell of a lot more support before its going to be an effective way to cull the whiners.
And just because you’ve had a few bad experiences doesn’t mean that the entire professions are rotten to the core. Seems to me you’re doing just as much bitching (probably more) as the people you’re bitching about.
I’ve usually heard it in the context of teachers bristling at any notion that they should be graded on the results that they achieve, in their jobs.
When someone suggests ANY level of accountability, based on outcomes, the teachers will start screaming and crying, about how there’s nothing that they could do any differently, they’re already doing their best, and nothing is their fault. So it would be incredibly unfair and downright villainous to even consider evaluating their job performance.
Well, if that’s the case, then it shouldn’t be possible to buy better results. ARE they holding back and underperforming, as a form of industrial action? If so, that’s kind of a dick move, from the perspective of the kids that are being under-taught. Also, if that’s what they’re doing, then they need to be more direct in explaining the situation.
If they literally said “we COULD do better, but you pay us like shit, so we’re not really trying. You get what you pay for,” I would respect that.
But nobody wants to say that. They want to be regarded as valiant, heroic martyrs, constantly struggling to do their absolute best, but ALSO they would totally take that extra green, if someone offered it.
You know, and I know this is completely anecdotal, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen people use a description like that except when they’re trying to dismiss the opinions of others. It puts the complaint on an emotional level rather than a rational one, as though it’s not worth consideration.
One can also do their best, but still not be up to par simply because they don’t have the resources available. If the teacher/student ratios are too high, so they can’t address all issues necessary. If they don’t have the physical resources available to provide adequate education, out-of-date or just poorly made textbooks, or the resources they do have are politicized to the degree that they can only teach misinformation without risking their job.
And I think our experience with standardization is a perfect example for why they might be reticent to accept evaluations as a way to determine effectiveness. If those evaluations don’t take into account the previous things I mentioned, talented and capable teachers may get the axe through no fault of their own.
Not to mention… maybe you’re just seeing a vocal minority. Of people who aren’t capable and just don’t want to lose their safe job. That doesn’t necessarily reflect teachers as a whole.
And finally… while we are a capitalist society, and thus money is the (no longer) gold standard by which we measure success… just throwing money at something doesn’t necessarily fix it. It needs to go hand in hand with proper procedures, regulations, and a flexibility of contextual awareness over global standardization. Yes, money will help, but it’s no where near the only thing. It’s just the easiest to look at and say “We did a thing!” and “The thing doesn’t work, it’s someone else’s fault now!”
Yeah I think this person just dislikes educators
And is embarrassed they and/or their kids score poorly
This is where the argument always shifts. But it STARTS with “I personally need a bigger salary.”
And I don’t even disagree. Teachers should be making at LEAST twice the money they make. Take the money from the fucking sports programs at the state colleges and funnel that shit directly to the workaday teachers. But I think it’s weird that you try to wriggle away from the discussion about actual teacher pay. Be open about it. It seems weird, otherwise.
You mean like literally every other job? There are basically four jobs in modern, industrialized society, where you’re able to skate by and never be evaluated on your effectiveness: cops, nurses, politicians, and teachers. And all four of those groups are CONSTANTLY HANGING THEMSELVES UP ON THEIR CROSSES OF MARTYRDOM, BECAUSE “OOOOOHHH, NOOOOO, THE PEOPLE DON’T ACCEPT OUR EXCUSES FOR BEING SHITTY, EVEN WHEN WE’RE SHITTY!”
Not that we, the rest of the people can actually DO anything about it. You can’t get any of the people in those protected groups fired, for basically any performance-related reason.
As a person who has only ever been on the receiving end of nursing, law enforcement, politics, and teaching, believe me: I have encountered plenty of shitty people in all those professions. But none of the people who actually work in those categories are ever subjected to the kind of performance-based, results-based evaluations that all the rest of us simply have to expect, in our lives.
Every other job involves results-based performance reviews. If you get bad results, you can get demoted, get penalized, or get fired. Even if you have reasonable excuses for your failures. The only exception would be if you work for yourself, and then you’re subject to the market itself. If you do a shitty job, people won’t want to use your products or services.
But, again, if you’re a cop, a nurse, a teacher, or a politician, you don’t have to worry. As long as you play the politics correctly, your failures don’t matter. You’ll be shielded from them, as long as you’re in good standing with your peers.
I’m not happy about that, and I don’t think I should be.
And those metrics are also often bullshit made up by middle managers to make themselves look good.
I dont disagree that we should hold basic services like that to a higher standard… but especially with teachers (and nurses) they need a hell of a lot more support before its going to be an effective way to cull the whiners.
And just because you’ve had a few bad experiences doesn’t mean that the entire professions are rotten to the core. Seems to me you’re doing just as much bitching (probably more) as the people you’re bitching about.