|This is from Mark Naison, an author and professor at Fordham in NYC — gfb|
An excellent description of how insanely hard teachers have to work, and why I am so glad I was able to retire before having a nervous breakdown or dying from stress and overwork. For many, many workers, including teachers, the idea of a ‘mere’ 40-hour work week is a joke. There is no possible way to get all the required tasks done even with a 100-hour work week, which ought to be illegal.
The only remedy is much, much smaller class sizes – like what they have at the very best private schools.
For many years, I held various jobs as a publishing executive (in later years at very high levels). I thought that I worked very, very hard.
Then I returned to teaching.
Everything I did before was a vacation by comparison.
Teaching is relentless in its demands on one’s time and energy. I came to school this year and found that I had 190 students, 3 minutes between classes, no prep period on half my days, car line duty in the morning, 20 minutes for lunch, two extracurricular activities to coach (including plays to produce), administrative meetings one day a week after school, 20 detailed lesson plans to prepare each week (specifying the class, period, standards covered, lesson objectives, assessments used, bellwork, vocabulary covered, and ESOL strategies and 504 and IEP accommodations employed), a requirement that I post 16 grades per quarter per student (for 190 students for 4 quarters, that’s 12,160 grades in the school year, or 67.56 grades per day), enormous amounts of paperwork (filing, photocopying, keeping a parent/teacher log, filling out reports of many kinds, preparing class handouts and tests, keeping attendance logs, posting grades), many, many special meetings (parent-teacher conferences being among the most frequent), and classes and tests to take to maintain my certification.
If I assigned a five-paragraph theme to each of my students, I would have 950 paragraphs to read–roughly the equivalent of a short novel.
Basically, there isn’t enough time for ANYONE–even the greatest of teachers–to do the job at all adequately. This is the great unspoken truth about teaching. This is the real elephant in the room. If you want to improve teaching and learning, you have to give teachers more time–MUCH, MUCH MORE TIME.
And somehow, with all those demands, you are supposed to give each student the individual attention that he or she deserves. Anything short of one-on-one tutorial is a compromise, of course. And that’s that the job boils down to. A great compromise.
And the attitude of administrators is typically, “Well, what’s the matter with you? Why don’t you just do x? Why didn’t you just do y? Any good teacher would be doing z every day.” As though teachers were people of leisure with all the time in the world. I have noticed that administrators label practically every email that they send out IMPORTANT and use exclamation marks ALL THE TIME: “Due today! Must be completed by Thursday! Mandatory attendance!” I have sometimes wondered whether they shouldn’t be issued, at the beginning of the year, a maximum number of quotation marks that they can use. Of course, they are just responding to the similar insane demands that are placed upon them by the central office and my regulatory requirements.
I attended a small rally for open government and transparency this morning at the Wilson Building in downtown DC, sponsored by the Washington Teachers’ Union.
The issue is a move to make it so that no one — not even the WTU, which is the bargaining agent for all DCPS teachers — would be able to see any teacher evaluation data, even with names or other identifying information redacted. To be sure, the Union is not interested in having names and scores of teachers printed in the Washington Post or put on-line. However, Using leaked data from DCPS’s first year of the IMPACT teacher evaluation system, I have shown on this blog that the evaluation system is basically invalid, since there is only a very low correlation between classroom observation scores and “value-added” scores computed by an incomprehensible “black box” algorithm whose details teachers are not permitted to see or examine.
If we had more data on these invalid scores, we would probably discover that, as in New York City, the “Value-Added” scores jump around wildly from year to year for any given teacher, even if they are teaching the exact same subject and grade level and at the same school, teaching very similar kids. (R-Squared in NYC was less than 0.1, which means essentially no correlation at all! In DC, r-squared correlation between classroom observation scores and “value-added” scores was about 0.13, also quite low.)
That’s me in the back holding the handmade sign with graphs I made.