This article, embedded in the title, talks about the upcoming application deadline for a federal educational grant program called "Race to the Top." This program offers money to states' educational system for innovative teaching and more rigid test standards. Although this could potentially bring in as much as $700 million to some states' educational budget, many districts in California as well as Florida have declined the money because of the federal guidelines. One of the major issues in the federal guidelines is a teacher evaluation program in which a teacher may be fired if he or she is not teaching at certain standards.
In regards to California education, I believe some of this money could be useful to our education. With teacher and program cuts in our district some money could be beneficial instead of taking more of our parents' money via the Fair Share program. However, I would find it hard to be able to just take the money and let many good teachers be fired just because their students can not uphold certain standards that the teacher would then be held responsible for. I'm not really arguing for an "Educational Bailout", but some money for the states' educational programs would be much appreciated. Maybe we should create a better program since many states are having issues with this one.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I have not yet fully thought out my position on this, though I do have some ideas I'd like to throw around.
With the teacher evaluation program, I believe we must ask ourselves who our education system is intended to help. Are we more interested in churning out quality students who know their material and are passionate about learning? Or are we more for the teacher's jobs, keeping more people employed over a period of time?
Also, I find that this will be more detrimental to students and schools as it will give more money to schools doing well and less money to those doing poorly. It's like the old saying does, "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer."
To Franklin:
"With the teacher evaluation program, I believe we must ask ourselves who our education system is intended to help. Are we more interested in churning out quality students who know their material and are passionate about learning? Or are we more for the teacher's jobs, keeping more people employed over a period of time?"
We're much more interested in improving students' education. However, how are we going to do that? Who is going to facilitate it? It could a ploy from teachers and schools to get more money but I HIGHLY doubt it.
"Also, I find that this will be more detrimental to students and schools as it will give more money to schools doing well and less money to those doing poorly. It's like the old saying does, 'the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.'"
It's always been like that. Look at Baywood Elementary right next to us. It's not even a private school, yet it's been funded, donated, and contributed to like a private school. Baywood reaches it's academic standards exceptionally well, so that's why. Trust me, I know.
The educational system would be much more manageable if we could only "fire" students who aren't meeting certain standards.
Drew, I think the first step to improving education as a whole is to weed out the bad teachers. I find that I learn better and more passionately when being taught by a good teacher. What constitutes a good teacher, I'm not sure exactly, but I'm sure you can tell when one is good or bad.
I am well aware it's been like that, however, is it in our interests to further enforce the idea? Should we do something to help the general public or are we still sticking with the idea that the good institutions should get better and the worse off institutions don't deserve a chance?
To Franklin:
"What constitutes a good teacher, I'm not sure exactly, but I'm sure you can tell when one is good or bad."
Experience and competence.
"Should we do something to help the general public or are we still sticking with the idea that the good institutions should get better and the worse off institutions don't deserve a chance?"
Do you want to donate money to a failing institution? It's a fifty-fifty chance but, still. We're seeing this happening with the economy in terms of spending and you already know that people don't want to risk money like that. That's the barebones of it. To be honest, I wouldn't want to risk my money like that either. I'm very frugal.
Drew, I know that much, but how do you define competence? Experience? Competence, the ability to teach well? And then you're in a loop, but we get the point, I would hope.
I see your point, though I cannot help but disagree. I think I see this situation in the ideal. I guess a realistic sense must be adopted. However, I cannot help but hope that most institutions are not failures as a school, but rather the demographics of the school location isn't up to par, if you will.
Post a Comment