On 7/01/09, rich wrote:
>> It just makes me think that in the end the TI is an instrument that can't
>> differentiate between authentic student-centered teacher and just plain
> laziness.
Well, actually the idea of a "student-centered" philosophy is that it would be more
work for the teacher. Instead of focusing on the next chapter in the textbook and
using the book's worksheet, you would design curriculum that focuses on the
differing learning styles of your students. This might mean that the class is
divided into groups, each pursuing a different project with different assessment, or
students would have one of several options. This all smacks of a LOT of work, not less.
My "drawing a picture" example was jumped on as "watering down the content." Yeah,
"draw me Romeo and Julliet stick figures and we'll call it a day" would be watering
down content and assessment, but that's not exactly what I meant. Basically, in a
"student-centered" model, a teacher would be open minded enough to accept a drawing
from a visually-inclined learner as he/she would a traditional book report.
However, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I could get a 95 Student Centered
score, because I know the test, but that crap wouldn't fly in my classroom. Now, I
think it does work in SOME schools, and in a Self-Contained Elementary setting where
one teacher controls all content and can create uniformity and high standards, it
may be good. Still, before becoming a teacher and now administrator, I was in the
military and then state civil service. I guess I can swallow, "take this test and
get a good score to get a job," state of things more than the average person. When
you've seen someone get arrested because he left underwear hanging from his lamp, as
I did in the Air Force, you learn to follow rules and do what you're told. Its
just a hurdle you have to jump through.
>
> My definition of student-centeredness is acting in the best interests of the
> student after careful reflection.
This the one of the major issues with "student centeredness." That's what most
superintendents and school boards think too. Sure, you care about students, so
you're student centered. Nope. Not that being "student centered" means you don't
care about students, but that's not really what its about. Its about
differentiation as a way of life in education. Its basically about students being
able to sit next to another student in the same room, with the same teacher, and
have almost entirely different curriculum. TI and other behavior inventories are
not based on this basic "care about students" model, but about the differentiation
model.
> Therefore, I'm not sure why holding content
> in high regard is not considered to be student-centered.
It can be, but usually the teachers who are content-locked are viewed as respecting
the content more than students, from the SC point of view. So, you love US history
so much, you might not be willing to let a student, I dunno, tape a video skit about
the Civil War, instead of knowing dates and times.
Now, where my district failed, is that it said it was student centered, used TI and
other SC personality inventories and interviews, and got SC teachers. The problem
is, more than most, they want students to pass multiple-choice, standardized finals
and are very content and data driven. Its interesting that they had those of us
interviewing in a lock-step, rigid system to find all these free spirits. We got
them, and they don't fit.
> Mark's post again confirms my suspicions that principals really don't know how
> to identify what they want in a teacher and are all too willing to let Gallup do
> their thinking for them.
In my district, Principals, and special ed administrators like myself, don't get to
identify the type of teacher we want. Its micromanaged by people who never see
students, and maybe never have.
> I am far from convinced that Gallup can identify decent
> teachers either. When 90&37; of my students anonymously evaluate me as an
> Excellent or Very Good teacher for 7 years, but TI puts a hand up and says, "Oh
> no you don't," something is wrong.
You gave student evaluations every year for 7 years? Why?
In any event, how do you know your TI score? What are they? How did you get them?
Has someone told you its the TI score that's holding you up? If you don't know, it
could be something else. You obviously have at least 7 years experience, and
probably have a Master's degree, so it could be that you cost too much, or a number
of other issues.
The TI is not identifying people that
> students will respond to and learn from. And in my definition, that is not
> acting in the best interests of the students and is not student-centered.
Well, again, you have to get on the bus and quit thinking about your opinion and
your definition. If you check your opinion of what "student-centered learning" is
when you take the test, and focus on what Gallup says it is, you might do a lot
better and get a job. Give the right answers, get the score, get the job, and then
do what you need to in your classroom.
Where are you that TI is used everywhere? I'm familiar with several districts in my
area that don't use it. In fact, I'd say that a majority don't use it. It does
cost quite a bit of money, and some districts are starting to see that they aren't
"student centered" in the philosophical sense.
