Education >
Educational Philosophy
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedDo contracts signed by teachers and principals actually have an effect on the ability of students to learn - particularly students in struggling schools?
Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| Yes | 29% | 27 votes | Total: 93 votes | |
| No | 71% | 66 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThe contract has everything to do with the quality of education your child is receiving. Union negotiated contracts have varying effects on the outcome of a child's education than a non-union contract does. Principals' contracts also influence how your child learns. Here's why.
Union negotiations are generally focused upon three major things. They are pay including a benefit packages, working conditions, and employment security. Union representation and bargaining focuses more on teacher's interests. It gives less attention to how that performance affects student outcomes. Research shows that union schools reach the middle of the road children better than the top and bottom kids. Money that could have been spent on special classes or help is funneled into payroll and benefits. These contracts do affect a child's education, especially if the child is functioning in the top or bottom of their class.
Non union schools contracts are not as focused on staff desires. Research shows for varying reasons that they usually reach all children better.
The principals' contracts in my opinion need to begin to focus on the fact that they are the educational leaders in their buildings. They also need to be a part of the bargaining procedure as to allow the union to know that they may get what they want but they must also give in to requests for the sake of the children's education.
Both teachers and administration are responsible for the education of our youth. They should barter for their rights. But, the children's education must come first. They need to collaborate to pursue common goals. For example, if the teachers union asks for more time to collaborate with their team members the administrators may ask for them to use this time to research new ideas. They may ask for verification of this use through weekly progress sheets. This would allow the staff to have the time they desire but with the goal that they use it part of it to improve/ update their teaching methods.
Another idea might be that if teachers' are given higher pay then they must be able to verify that they are in fact teaching using best practices. Researched based teaching should be proven. Yes, they may not get the same results as next door. But, if they are trying by using the best methods then that should be rewarded.
Contracts do have power in our schools. They need to be worded as to demand professional standards. They should no longer accept less. Negotiations need to be a tool to help the educational outcome in our schools progress. They should not just focus on how many sick days a staff member receives or how many children are in a classroom. They need to give all children what society wants for them, a proper education.
Learn more about this author, Pamela Sigler Taylor.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
"If the student hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught" has been around for years, and it says a lot. Contracts can only benefit students if those contracts have provisions for how much progress a teacher could make in a students learning ability. A number of students are always in the dark simply because the little light in their brain didn't go on when a teacher fails to get the message across to get the students attention, or I should say makes sense to the student.
Some students are normally bright whereas they need little in the way of understanding whatever it is a teacher is providing during class. Others have a hard time and do not question everything that they didn't comprehend, and the only good thing about that, it doesn't waste the teachers time, or the other students time as well, if the teacher trying to cover each topic and some do not understand.
These students are not any less intelligent, but rather lack the ability to understand some things that could easily be understood if a teacher were to simply add a quick explanation of what he or she means when presenting anything to the class. Some of these students who cannot comprehend immediately, show superior knowledge about other things that many bright students have zero knowledge of, and that is why a bright student may not be able to operate a high tech piece of electronics whereas the student that doesn't grasp everything in class can build one.
You can't expect all students to get the message at the same time because everyone has a different level of comprehension, and unless a teacher can teach in a way that makes sense to the whole class, then some students are left in a situation whereas they are unprepared to move ahead when it comes to learning.
If teachers were to have some kind of requirement whereas they must be able to teach in a way that enables slower students to learn along with the rest, then we can say that contracts might help or benefit students, but until we see that provision included in a contract, most teachers will teach in a way that is convenient for them, and if some don't get it, they still sleep nights.
There are teachers who take pride in providing their students with an example of what they mean by what they say so that the students can clearly understand enough to get acceptable grades. It's unfortunate that when contracts are made, it is usually to benefit the teachers without regard for how well the students may learn from them.
As one who had a hard time comprehending what my teachers were trying to teach, it was extremely difficult for me to get higher grades even though I had an extremely high IQ, and had many talents for doing many things wiz kids lacked.
Knowing what I know first hand about what an attention disorder can do, I would hope that those who draw up contracts would include some kind of requirement that teachers learn how to deal with those who lack full comprehension through no fault of their own.
A classic example would be a science teacher discussing a light year where most of the class understand what a light year is, and others think it's how long a light bulb would last. This is no joke, it's true, if you ask the question, you'd be surprised as to how many people would give the wrong answer.
However, I used that just as one example of how important it is for the teacher to explain something in a way that everyone is able to understand exactly what the teacher means by what they are trying to teach. As it stands, contracts as they are do little to benefit the students, but certainly line the pockets of the teachers whether they are the best, or if they are the poorest.
Learn more about this author, Richard Serra.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Educational Philosophy
- Do alternative reality games damage children's social skills?
- Is engaging parents in their children's education a major factor in turning around low-performing schools?
- Do shorter summer vacations signal the end of summer breaks for students?
- Should basic skills tests evaluate Internet reading?
- Is it appropriate for President Obama to give a nationally televised speech to school children?
- Standardized test scores: A good way to measure student ability in the Internet age?
