In teaching, the implications are even more profound. They suggest that we shouldn’t be raising standards. We should be lowering them, because there is no point in raising standards if standards don’t track with what we care about. Teaching should be open to anyone with a pulse and a college degree—and teachers should be judged after they have started their jobs, not before. That means that the profession needs to start the equivalent of Ed Deutschlander’s training camp. It needs an apprenticeship system that allows candidates to be rigorously evaluated. Kane and Staiger have calculated that, given the enormous differences between the top and the bottom of the profession, you’d probably have to try out four candidates to find one good teacher. That means tenure can’t be routinely awarded, the way it is now. Currently, the salary structure of the teaching profession is highly rigid, and that would also have to change in a world where we want to rate teachers on their actual performance. An apprentice should get apprentice wages. But if we find eighty-fifth-percentile teachers who can teach a year and a half’s material in one year, we’re going to have to pay them a lot—both because we want them to stay and because the only way to get people to try out for what will suddenly be a high-risk profession is to offer those who survive the winnowing a healthy reward.
martes, 9 de diciembre de 2008
Cómo tener a los mejores profesores
Nos lo cuenta Malcolm Gladwell en New Yorker. Muy interesante (aunque al que no le guste el fútbol americano se va a aburrir...). Y no sólo aplicable a la enseñanza primaria y secundaria, sino también a la Universidad. Además, creo que lo condensa todo en este párrafo:
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario