From their page: iRead is a group of teachers in Escondido Union School District dedicated to the idea that digital audio can be a powerful learning tool for all students. iRead will give you a chance to create meaningful, curriculum-centered audio projects with your students. Teachers are using digital audio tools (iPods, mics, Garageband, iTunes, Keynote, etc. and various accessories) to improve reading processes. Teachers meet on a monthly basis to exchange ideas and strategies. We started in 2006-07 by collecting data about fluency rates - this has been very promising.
I am reading this in my CI 151 class. An actual teacher who is concerned with student voice and making his class relevant to his students. Good description of his classroom and 'success' story.
I totally understand why experienced teachers may feel this way. HOWEVER, this is a way for our school system to make sure that teachers are at least addressing the correct material in class.
I can see how failing inner city schools, with students in the absolute worst conditions, might benefit from a scripted program. I don't agree that it's right, but I can see how one might justify the implementation of such a method when all else seems to have failed. I cringed at the end of the article when the teacher said that the scripted program "allowed for alittle bit of personality" on the teacher's part to show through... A LITTLE BIT?! Isn't the personality of the teacher that acts as an example for the students? isn't it the personality of the teacher that students "judge" right off the bat, sometimes effecting how much they choose to learn and participate in that particular class? I can't believe people actually believe our whole nation, which is SUPPOSED to be a diverse melting pot of people and experience, should adopt this rigid and inflexible curriculum method.
I agree that direct instruction may help some students but I feel like a scripted lesson denies the individuality of the students and the teacher. These types of lessons tell you how to conduct the lesson word for word as well as how to answer students' questions. I feel like this takes all creativity out of teaching and turns the teacher into a robot. These systems are also meant to "teacher-proof" the classroom so that even bad teacher can "teach" as long as they know how to read.
Wow and the scripted curriculum even tells the teacher how to answer questions?! If school, especially high school, is supposed to reflect a small scale-real world for students then what kind of message are we sending when we ("we" being teachers) are told how to do everything by a higher power; that we're all more successful if we do everything exactly the same all the time? So much for the development of critical literacy.
I don't have evidence to back this up as it was from the mouth of one of my credential program profs. but what he said was that for the first couple of years teachers have to play a political game to make sure they get tenure then once they have it, its a different game they play with the school and the union. Not all "bad" teachers are really "bad" teachers, but for those that really are my prof. argued that the system works if the admin is actually willing to follow through to the end, which can be as long as 2 years. Most admins aren't willing. Sorry I can't provide evidence to back that up.
Yeah, that's really sad that administrators aren't willing to go through the process, however long and arduous it may be, to make the learning environment a better place.
I have heard that as well, Ben. Admins rarely put in the effort to reprimand teachers. The teacher's union protects all teachers, good or bad. Admins are afraid to go up against the union because they have so much power. I think teacher's union might be the problem with the whole tenure thing. Another interesting note. If you look at the leadership of teacher's unions i.e. the reps. They are some of the "bad" teachers. I know this is true in Madera, and I have been told the same thing occurs in other districts. I find that fascinating. Bad teachers protecting bad teachers. Hhhmmm. Bad system maybe?
Tenure provides teachers with job security and generally is awarded a few years after educators enter the profession
Sadly, tenure is being mis-used. The original intention of tenure was for teachers to have due-process if they were being fired; it was an effort to help. Now it has turned into a "job for life," and many districts have to treat it like that or they will have to pay big money to the Unions.
yeah I have read this statement time and time again. I guess it would make a huge difference to students and the administrations if the tenure teachers were ineffective, but I just don't see a negative trend among teachers that have earned their tenure. I have had quite a few tenure teachers at Fresno State and they are not all old burned out senile geezers that need to be fired.
There is a section towards the middle of this article where they talk about principals not wanting to "deal with" the ensuing process after they discover a less-than-effective tenure teacher... I find that to be kind of a scary thought... The PRINCIPALS, the administration in charge of ensuring the best for our students, don't want to deal with the problems that they were hired to face if necessary?! I think that evaluating the teachers and giving them feedback is important for the teachers (especially the "bad" ones) but what happens when the people in charge of evaluating them feel like it''s "pointless?"