Introduction
The goal of this brief post on Melinda Gates and her PBS interview concerning the cultivation of highly effective teachers in the United States, is to take a position on the video’s material in terms of its 21st Century real world implications. After providing background on the core content required for the discussion in this post, your author’s position will be identified and supported with relevant educational research.
Video Background
In the video entitled “Melinda Gates on the Importance of Evaluations in Teaching” Gates explains her foundation’s past and current educational goal. When discussing her organization’s past goal Gates explained that the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation once focused on assisting districts with creating schools in which class sizes were very small. They did this operating under the idea that small class size was the quintessential factor in allowing effective learning to take place (Shear et al., 2008). The foundation has updated their goals in accordance with research they conducted while investigating student achievement gains in schools with small class sizes. That research reflected a fact that is currently accepted by masters of education. Namely, that the most important element of an effective classroom (and effective instruction) is the teacher. In turn, Gates explained that the foundation’s new goal would be to aide in the development of highly effective teachers in all schools within the United States. Gates does acknowledge that there are other factors that lead to effective learning (namely strong administrational leadership and parent support) but maintains that these factors are dwarfed when compared to the positive influence of an effective teacher.
Gates on highly effective teaching
In the interview made available on the PBS web site, Gates explains that the foundation’s goal of aiding schools in the development of highly effective teachers can be best described by detailing the three educational items that teachers are in the greatest need of.
What to teach. Gates explains that the first major need of teachers is to be told what they need to teach and by (e.g. a date or time in the school year) when they must teach it. This led to Gates’ foundation to working with other organizations to fund the Common Core State Standards Initiative which according to Gates, 48 states have adopted as their primary set of educational standards.
Curriculum Support. Gates explains that the second major need of teachers is curriculum support in the form of modules. These modules are educational teaching materials made available to teachers and are aligned with the established common curriculum to ensure students are taught the required material. A need for such alignment is discussed in Martone and Sireci’s (2007) research article.
Professional Development via Teacher Evaluations. Gates explains that the third need of teachers is professional development which according to her, would be gained through effective teacher evaluations. According to Gates, the current evaluations in which administrators observe and check boxes reading satisfactory or unsatisfactory should be replaced by more in-depth tools that allow observers to acknowledge teacher behaviors and teaching practices identified as being highly effective. She advocates for peer teachers who are able to recognize these practices and are then able to coach fellow teachers in effective teaching practices if needed (in essence, to have a discussion about how the teacher is progressing).
Your Author’s Position
Your author is in agreement with Melinda Gates that the three educational items, detailed by Gates during the PBS interview described, are indeed needed in some shape or form by various teachers. What is not agreed upon, however, is that these items are able to be put into place as a realistic across-the-board solution to the problem of ineffective teaching.
On What to Teach. A standard curriculum does have benefits. Gates’ vision of school districts across the country being able to decide on, and require all students to learn, a set curriculum that contains the most important educational items could be positive. An alignment of the country’s curriculum (and in turn, the standards) would ensure students graduating from any district in the US would have learned the most important educational material. However, according to Martone and Sireci not all content standards for a state “can typically be assessed through large-scale standardized assessments” (p. 1355). Such large-scale assessments would come hand in hand with state standards. An across-the-board curriculum also brings with it a concerning question: what if the decided upon curriculum is flawed? In a system where schools have the flexibility to decide for themselves exactly what the core curriculum should be, the district’s hands would not be tied by a flawed curriculum. No matter how seemingly perfect a standardized curriculum and standard may appear, one must keep in mind that a singular group (or a small collection if groups) of individuals and organizations typically create these standards. That being a given, there is a likelihood that not all educational material within the standard curriculum will be seen as necessary by the district and its teachers. In turn, districts and district teachers should have the ability to modify any conflicts.
On Curriculum Support. Just as an available (but not required) standardized curriculum could benefit teachers, available curriculum support could as well (the educational modules described earlier). The issue here is if these units are required to be taught by the classroom teacher, they could limit the ability of the teacher to utilize his own units that have been designed to present the material as he sees fit. This aspect of Gates’ solution allows the possibility for the standardized curriculum to overshadow the instructor, his expertise, and his specialty whatever it may be. Rothman et al. (2002) also notes that when aligning a standard curriculum in this way, the effect may be a negative one as described.
On Professional Development via Teacher Evaluations. Gates explains that the school districts need a teacher evaluation system that acknowledges effective teaching strategies and a process in which peers (e.g. other teachers) observe and evaluate fellow instructors. While the former is realistic as the Pennsylvania public school system is taking on a new evaluation tool (Neuschafer, 2012), the latter does not factor-in the common inner-workings of public schools’ faculty. In public schools where peer evaluations are used, it is common for faculty to provide positive ratings for fellow instructors regardless of teaching skills in the name of teacher solidarity. A more realistic solution would be to hire a singular teacher supervisor who would focus on observing and coaching teachers (though this may prove to be impractical for some districts when district finances are evaluated).
Conclusions
In her interview on PBS, and through this post, Melinda Gates presented several possible solutions to educational problems related to the need for effective teachers. While the three main solutions being attempted by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are noteworthy ones, it is the opinion of your author that they will likely not work as the across-the-board solutions they are presented to be and that solutions allowing educational flexibility for districts are recommended.
References