Policy Embodiments
I am not currently practicing art teacher, so I am not familiar with the schools' policy and standards. However, when I read this book How Schools Do Policy, it reminds me of the article I read this semester. It is How Kids Learn Resilience. I am impressed by a economic professor named Fryer at Harvard. "He has spent the past decade testing out a variety of incentive schemes with public-school students in Houston, New York, Chicago, and other American cities that have school systems with high poverty rates." It is very interesting that he spent money in encouraging students study, which is like the book introduces the COST. It is very interesting that most schools (not including colleges and universities) in China set up rewards for students in order to attract excellent students who choose these schools to study, so that it will improve the reputation of these schools because of the higher enrollment rate. Since the rewards are so attractive, most of the poor students in China are more hardworking. They believe that it is only through knowledge will they have a better, more successful future. However, according to Roland Fryer’s reward system, it was to “increase the time that low-income students spent on math homework, and to improve their scores on standardized math tests”. Unfortunately, this incentive program had no effect. Why do these situations take place differently between China and America? This is a big question! However, schools in China may more focus on E/F students because of the rate.
How Schools Do Policy 2: Reflection
It is meaningful to understand the differences between responsibility and accountability as discussed in the article that I read: Measure Against Measure: Responsibility Versus Accountability in Education. Actually, as a new-comer in the field of Education, I have no concept of the meaning of this terminology – responsibility and accountability. Seemingly, the two words have the same meaning. Certainly, teachers have the responsibility and accountability to teach well. I have a deeper understanding, however, about responsibility and accountability after reading this article. As the author says, “responsibility is internal self-guidance” which means teachers should have fidelity to place trust and reliance on their own personal experience in their particular field. By contrast, accountability “is just the external manifestation of responsibility”. It is like something we can see, such as measurement, assessment. However, today’s education is full of standardized assessments and results, so what is the role of responsibility? When does responsibility manifest itself? But the author says, “The responsibility requires solitude.” However, it seems that people living in the society would prefer to work in groups instead of working alone. If someone exhibits isolation in his/her work, people would be critical of his/her work. I agree with the idea that people who want to make some exceptional work need to be isolated. However, I want to distinguish between the various situations. For instance, currently production of a movie is usually generated by several movie companies working together. They undertake the high risks, simultaneously, sharing the profits. Evidently, group work in this situation is better than individual work. On the contrary, some professional work should be done by individuals. For example, scriptwriter is a type of work that needs solitary environment. If he/she is interrupted, the quality of the scenario may not be good. Normally, he/she intently focuses on the scenario and makes sure his/her work meets expectations. At this point, I completely agree with the author talking about the working alone. It seems that a person “is able to communicate, to commune with” themselves peacefully. “Responsibility involves a certain abandonment, a willingness to give oneself over to” something. Personally, I prefer to work in a group, because we can brainstorm and create new ideas. Most of the time it is impossible for people to create some wonderful ideas individually.
There is no doubt that responsibility plays a significant role in education, and it “exists at many levels and involves private searching, questioning, and adjustment.” However, an increasing number of people think that the accountability obstructs the possibility of responsibility, because it emphasizes the result. People “believe that results can be standardized” and “the standardized forms are the truth and the way of the future”. Have you considered why we in society pay attention to the results rather than the process? Why do the majority of people place so much value on the outcome? I have read so many articles criticizing assessment that focuses on outcome. Everyone in the schools pay attention to the results. Schools attach importance to the enrollment rate, teachers focus on teaching achievement, and students care about their grades. “These are only results”. So who cares about learning? I understand that each field has individual regulations and assessments. The arts, however, should “rely primarily on individual evaluation rather than standardized assessment”.
Students are assessed by teachers, so what about teachers? Who evaluates teachers? How is a teacher’s performance evaluated or is it evaluated? It is useful to read the article Arts teacher evaluation: How did we get there? This article provides lots of historical information about art teacher evaluation and some evaluation systems. However, it is perplexing to read the first paragraph which talks about “an art teacher at Howard Middle School in Orlando whose value-added score was compiled from Howard’s overall reading – and math – score data.” What is the rational explanation for the fact that some art teachers are “evaluated on the scores of students they do not teach and in subjects outside their instructional responsibilities.” That is so ridiculous. I believe that these parameters should be minor considerations in the art teacher evaluation process So, how do art teachers protect themselves around the periphery of accountability? I am sure that characteristics such as the basis of being a qualified teacher, and the professional training of a teacher need to be considered. These two ways were primary in the instructional supervision in pre-World War Two. Further, the evaluation system placed emphasis on management, psychology, teacher behavior (inputs) and student result (outputs). At this point, I am confused why student results are connected to teacher’s evaluation? Is it fair to evaluate a teacher by using the student’s result? Moreover, it should not be ignored that some principals evaluate teachers on the basis of “lack of the requisite knowledge to give helpful feedback on content-specific aspects of instruction.” I think we need to find more relevant parameters to use in the evaluation of art teachers. For example, how do students feel to in the art classroom environment? Principals could interview students personally or give students survey forms. Unfortunately, we should recognize that “some evaluation instruments may not be fair and equitable for use with art teachers.” In addition, what is related to teacher effectiveness? Teacher’s classroom experience, or graduate degrees? I am not currently a practicing teacher, but I think it is helpful to gain more teaching experience. Because when you encounter some situations that are difficult to handle, it may help you find ways to address them. I strongly agree with several suggestions that the author provides, for example, “art teachers should challenge any attempt to use student achievement/growth data from non-arts content areas.” However, knowledge gained from non-arts achievement assessments might be of value to help teachers determine individual student’s response to different teaching approaches or to a particular learning style. What’s more, I believe that “purposeful and substantive visual art experiences can (and did) support the literacy learning of K-5 boys.”
Reference:
Diana Senechal, Measure Aaainst Measure: Responsibility Versus Accountability in Education;
Ryan D. Shaw, Arts teacher evaluation: How did we get there?
Diana Senechal, The Paradox of Change: How Change and Stasis Combine in Education;
Mary J. Franco, Kathleen Unrath, The Art of Engaging Young Men as Writers;
There is no doubt that responsibility plays a significant role in education, and it “exists at many levels and involves private searching, questioning, and adjustment.” However, an increasing number of people think that the accountability obstructs the possibility of responsibility, because it emphasizes the result. People “believe that results can be standardized” and “the standardized forms are the truth and the way of the future”. Have you considered why we in society pay attention to the results rather than the process? Why do the majority of people place so much value on the outcome? I have read so many articles criticizing assessment that focuses on outcome. Everyone in the schools pay attention to the results. Schools attach importance to the enrollment rate, teachers focus on teaching achievement, and students care about their grades. “These are only results”. So who cares about learning? I understand that each field has individual regulations and assessments. The arts, however, should “rely primarily on individual evaluation rather than standardized assessment”.
Students are assessed by teachers, so what about teachers? Who evaluates teachers? How is a teacher’s performance evaluated or is it evaluated? It is useful to read the article Arts teacher evaluation: How did we get there? This article provides lots of historical information about art teacher evaluation and some evaluation systems. However, it is perplexing to read the first paragraph which talks about “an art teacher at Howard Middle School in Orlando whose value-added score was compiled from Howard’s overall reading – and math – score data.” What is the rational explanation for the fact that some art teachers are “evaluated on the scores of students they do not teach and in subjects outside their instructional responsibilities.” That is so ridiculous. I believe that these parameters should be minor considerations in the art teacher evaluation process So, how do art teachers protect themselves around the periphery of accountability? I am sure that characteristics such as the basis of being a qualified teacher, and the professional training of a teacher need to be considered. These two ways were primary in the instructional supervision in pre-World War Two. Further, the evaluation system placed emphasis on management, psychology, teacher behavior (inputs) and student result (outputs). At this point, I am confused why student results are connected to teacher’s evaluation? Is it fair to evaluate a teacher by using the student’s result? Moreover, it should not be ignored that some principals evaluate teachers on the basis of “lack of the requisite knowledge to give helpful feedback on content-specific aspects of instruction.” I think we need to find more relevant parameters to use in the evaluation of art teachers. For example, how do students feel to in the art classroom environment? Principals could interview students personally or give students survey forms. Unfortunately, we should recognize that “some evaluation instruments may not be fair and equitable for use with art teachers.” In addition, what is related to teacher effectiveness? Teacher’s classroom experience, or graduate degrees? I am not currently a practicing teacher, but I think it is helpful to gain more teaching experience. Because when you encounter some situations that are difficult to handle, it may help you find ways to address them. I strongly agree with several suggestions that the author provides, for example, “art teachers should challenge any attempt to use student achievement/growth data from non-arts content areas.” However, knowledge gained from non-arts achievement assessments might be of value to help teachers determine individual student’s response to different teaching approaches or to a particular learning style. What’s more, I believe that “purposeful and substantive visual art experiences can (and did) support the literacy learning of K-5 boys.”
Reference:
Diana Senechal, Measure Aaainst Measure: Responsibility Versus Accountability in Education;
Ryan D. Shaw, Arts teacher evaluation: How did we get there?
Diana Senechal, The Paradox of Change: How Change and Stasis Combine in Education;
Mary J. Franco, Kathleen Unrath, The Art of Engaging Young Men as Writers;