Follow up to Teaching to a Test
I wrote this as a response to a peer who asked a few questions to gain further clarity on the reflection I wrote on Teaching to a Test. She responded:
As far as doctors go, there are shifts/rifts/movements/changes in the medical world (despite the woes of insurance companies) about how we see and experience medicine as a field and how doctors should/should not "be" with their patients. I (of course) don't remember now what it was I was reading/watching, but medicine used to be about how much information do I know - and it is (finally) shifting to a more holistic, healer-like position.
So, directly answering your question, if a doctor is going to open up my chest to knock on the old clicker, then I do want him to have a certain amount of knowledge about the human body and how it works. But I also want her to be the one who meets with me before and after, to answer my questions, to be present to me as a patient, to help me heal.
I think it would be lovely if doctors worked as a team. Think about if we organized doctors offices as if they were middle school subject teams - "Okay, you have the neurology, I'll take the endocrinology,..." - how interesting would that be! And how well might we all be taken care of.
Now... as to measuring teachers... I have a few follow up questions that might further the conversation...
We have in our culture this fascination... obsession... I'll even go so far as to call it a fetish or addiction... to measurement and measuring things. And - to my understanding - there really are no bounds/truth to trying to measure human/social behavior/psychology/etc.
If - big if - we were able to develop a fool-proof (interesting words there) rubric to evaluate teachers, and the top "score" was five stars, what does that mean? Is a five star teacher a five star teacher all the time? Who came up with the number five anyway? And why a star? It seems like trying to simplify an extremely complex situation... for no reason other than because that's what we think we need to do.
And - lawyers. What a loaded question! Beyond why it is interesting that we need so many lawyers - how do we find one? I think we trust our gut and go talk to them! Ask others, consult with friends/family, speak to prior clients and get their feedback. That's where I'd start at least.
I want it differently too. And I'm interested in exploring ways to move in that direction.
--
Originally posted on September 30, 2010 per the requirements of EAC 539: Teaching in the Online Environment at NC State University in Raleigh, North Carolina.
- How do we make sure our doctors know what they are doing before they open my chest cavity to perform surgery? Can we request a team of doctors to work on me? Wouldn't that be more innovative and utilize the best talents from each surgeon?
- How should the state and federal government measure teachers? I agree that standardized testing of children is flawed, but what is a viable solution?
- And how do we shop for a good lawyer?
As far as doctors go, there are shifts/rifts/movements/changes in the medical world (despite the woes of insurance companies) about how we see and experience medicine as a field and how doctors should/should not "be" with their patients. I (of course) don't remember now what it was I was reading/watching, but medicine used to be about how much information do I know - and it is (finally) shifting to a more holistic, healer-like position.
So, directly answering your question, if a doctor is going to open up my chest to knock on the old clicker, then I do want him to have a certain amount of knowledge about the human body and how it works. But I also want her to be the one who meets with me before and after, to answer my questions, to be present to me as a patient, to help me heal.
I think it would be lovely if doctors worked as a team. Think about if we organized doctors offices as if they were middle school subject teams - "Okay, you have the neurology, I'll take the endocrinology,..." - how interesting would that be! And how well might we all be taken care of.
Now... as to measuring teachers... I have a few follow up questions that might further the conversation...
- Who benefits by measuring teachers?
- Who gets to measure the teachers?
- Why should state/federal government get to measure teachers?
- How do we measure teachers?
- Are there better/worse ways to measure teachers?
- What is gained in measuring teachers?
We have in our culture this fascination... obsession... I'll even go so far as to call it a fetish or addiction... to measurement and measuring things. And - to my understanding - there really are no bounds/truth to trying to measure human/social behavior/psychology/etc.
If - big if - we were able to develop a fool-proof (interesting words there) rubric to evaluate teachers, and the top "score" was five stars, what does that mean? Is a five star teacher a five star teacher all the time? Who came up with the number five anyway? And why a star? It seems like trying to simplify an extremely complex situation... for no reason other than because that's what we think we need to do.
And - lawyers. What a loaded question! Beyond why it is interesting that we need so many lawyers - how do we find one? I think we trust our gut and go talk to them! Ask others, consult with friends/family, speak to prior clients and get their feedback. That's where I'd start at least.
I want it differently too. And I'm interested in exploring ways to move in that direction.
--
Originally posted on September 30, 2010 per the requirements of EAC 539: Teaching in the Online Environment at NC State University in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Comments
Post a Comment