Recognizing Effective Teachers

Best "Best Teacher" medal:
Made out of chocolate!

Oftentimes it may seem that the only reward for an effective teacher is the teacher seeing the growth of their students under their tutelage. Certain school districts and educational programs have instituted “merit pay” systems that rewards teachers whose students receiver overall higher grades on standardized tests. However, this merit pay can leave students, parents, and even other teachers, skeptical that teachers are being rewarded for “teaching to a test” by way or emphasizing rote memorization or test-taking skills in lieu of actual critical thinking skills.

A method more akin to non-educational promotional methods is the “career ladder”. Effective teachers may be recognized for their skill as an educator by evaluation and achieve “rank” such as “master” or “mentor teacher” (Sadker 432). These ranks give the recognized teacher more say in things like selecting textbooks and shaping curricula. This seems to be one of the rewards beneficial to not only the recognized teacher but the rest of the department as the effective teacher has a chance to share what has been working for them with the other teachers.

A very prestigious for of recognizing teachers comes from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Teachers put together portfolios including videos, lesson plans, project mock-ups, etc, to show their level of effectiveness and ingenuity in the classroom. These portfolios are evaluated by the Board and the teachers put through challenging tests, observational sessions and, if the teacher is found to be exemplary, are awarded one of several “board certifications”. A certification complements a state teaching certification but is not a replacement for it. In fact, other than the prestige itself, the certification is not a guarantee of a raise or other monetary prize from the teacher's school districts. As the certification is an expensive process for the teacher some schools offer fee reimbursement should the teacher pass the certification.

Whether a teacher receives recognition for their effectiveness through monetary rewards, more responsibility, or wider influences, the main reward for teachers will always be making a difference in the lives of young adults.

Sadker, David Miller. Teachers, Schools, and Society, 2010 McGraw-Hill. New York.

Image: "Teachers Medal" Trulychocolates.co.uk Accessed 2012 Nov 27. [http://trulychocolates.co.uk/Teachers%20Medal]

Education Adequacy VS Education Equity

            Education adequacy is defined as a legal approach that ensures educational opportunities to poorer students based on state constitution guarantees for efficient, thorough, and uniform education (Sadker A-13). It is an approach that seeks to find the minimum a school and student must have and know in order to provide that for them. It is not something that ensures those poorer students receive the same quality and level of education that more wealthy students receive; it is not “education equity”.

            One of the reasons all schools are not created equal, though the students attending them are deemed so under the Constitution, is that the money funding those schools comes from the tax-payers. In a system where property taxes fund the school of the children paying those property taxes a wealthy neighborhood will have a more funded school compared to the school of a poorer neighborhood. Those who lobby for education equity seek a funding system that pools the money of both the poor and the wealthy neighborhood and divides the money between the two schools in such a way that the students of each receives a similar quality of education. This kind of system tends to meet resistance from the wealthier parents who subscribe to a form of education Darwinism. To these parents they have earned the money they pay into their school and thereby earned a better education for their offspring. The poorer parents argue that their children are equal citizens and should receive equal “protection” for their right to education in the form of monetary help. Poorer schools without this help may end up with inadequate books, unqualified teachers (Sadker 306), and therefore an inadequate education preventing the students from attaining a method of escaping the poverty cycle.

            Attaining educational equity between schools is obviously a difficult matter. Some states have made steps to improve the educational situation of the impoverished by creating legislation for more adequate education but the terms are general may be interpreted in a variety of ways. Some states require “sound basic” education, and others “thorough”, some “efficient” (Sadker 309). Without statistical data on monetary requirements of schools and legislation towards meeting that requirement, these “standards” are little more than hopeful goals.

Sadker, David Miller. Teachers, Schools, and Society, 2010 McGraw-Hill. New York.

Image: "South Carolina public school funding 2009-2010" Posted on July 8, 2009. Accessed 2012 Nov 27. [http://thevoiceforschoolchoice.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/south-carolina-public-school-funding-2009-2010/]

Major Philosophies of Contemporary US Education

“United States education” is an amalgamation of various educational systems created and governed by relatively small groups of people differentiated by locale and culture. Since the 1960s the US Government has tried to emphasize a curriculum based on the philosophy coined essentialism (Sadker 279); however these smaller groups of like minds bonded by culture and familiarity tend to strive to preserve personal histories and culture through perennialism (Sadker 281). As technology advances and communities become nearly national and global a mixed thread of social reconstruction and progressivism (Sadker 283) bind these philosophies together into what could be argued is the general form of contemporary US education.

Essentialism attempts to build educational foundations in maths, sciences, English, American history, and some argue, nationalism, while rigourously tracking “progress” through standardized testing. While essentialism seems to favor the forward analytical thinking of tomorrow's practical and disciplined leaders proponents of perennialism argue that such emphasis on testing and rote memorization must be balanced with the immersion of the mind in traditional lessons of morality and literacy penned by history's great thinkers. Yet both of these of philosophies seem to be “top-down” instructor oriented philosophies that exclude a view of the changing social landscape.

Social reconstructivists point out that many of “history's great thinkers” are “old white men” and that the struggles and viewpoints of minorities and women have been suppressed. They seek to add those crucial pieces of the puzzle back into US classrooms (Sadker 285) so students are exposed to the very real social problems and situations they will have to deal with as adults. Linking these philosophies together is progressivism. Progressivism (Sadker 283) seeks to apply pragmatism in education. Students are encouraged to use the knowledge gained by essentialism and the lessons learned from perennialism (whether good or bad) to analyze and tackle the situations presented by social reconstructivism. Combining these philosophies reveals the general view of contemporary US educational philosophies.

Sadker, David Miller, Teachers, Schools, and Society. 2010 McGraw-Hill, New York.

Image: Classroom Management, Its Principles and Technique by William C. Bagley". BetterWorldBooks .com. Accessed 2012 Nov 27. [http://www.betterworldbooks.com/classroom-management-id-1176552066.aspx]

The Role of Federal Government in Education

Conflict has always been a great motivation for forward thinking, new technology, and the drive for better education. As the Soviets dominated the Space Race in the 50s the United States Congress passed the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) to “enhance the security of the nation” (Sadker, 251). Legally decisions on education should be left to the state, as the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution states that anything not specifically mentioned as the job of the Federal Government should be left to individual states to frame as they please. While Americans took the NDEA in stride in the late 1950s and early 1960s (possibly because of positive propaganda or a general national desire to seem as bright and upwardly-mobile as rival countries), today states stand firm in their desire to decide what their students learn. Should the government be able to decide what the national education standards are?

"Colonial recitation lesson" - Sadker p238

The early leaders of the United States may have wanted to keep education out of the hands of the government for the same reason they wanted religion and state separate: to prevent Government curtailing their freedoms by telling the populace what to think (Sadker, 251). It could also have been that education was primarily a religious education to prepare young people to battle “Satan” by being able to read the Bible (Sadker 238) and the Constitutional framers had already instituted a separation of church and state. Still, as early as 1785 the government was able to set land aside for “public educational purposes” and use federal money to support the multitude of institutions that arose. Benjamin Franklin has established a secular “academy” in 1751 and a hundred years later there were over six-thousand academies (Sadker, 241) with practical curricula, most of them supported by federal money.

As time went on the government funded teacher training, veteran's tuition, school meal programs, head-start programs, bilingual education programs and much more (Sadker, 252). In the 21st century they have agreed upon a National Standard for Education. Yet because the states still hold education separate adoption is voluntary and some of the more religious states refuse even though their schools are, and have been, successful products of Federal development.

Sadker, David Miller. Teachers, Schools, and Society, 2010. Page 151.