"Lawrence school committee members did not know Laboy had failed the test twice and just last week they granted him a pay raise that made him the highest paid employee of the city of Lawrence."
Wow, I am right in the center of this. Thoughts conflict and pop me in the head one way, and then back the other. If he were a Bad Superintendent(ha ha, maybe Harvey Keitel could do a movie)I would probably say "out you go, you jerk." But if the superintendent was good, and had made effective changes, I might say "give him another chance."
I know this is hypocritical, but I think there are times when, in order to be fair, you have to be unequal. One of my best mentor teachers lived that philosophy. If a child needed more time, or less time, bigger paper, pen instead of pencil, she made sure the other kids knew that she needed that, and that is why she was getting it. They understood completely.
So, maybe we should give this man what he needs: more time.
<slap>
Or, maybe he should pass the test or get out.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this, because mine are whirling.
posted
I say suspend him without pay until he can pass that test.
Out of the 24 teachers who failed the oral test, how many do you think have teaching English as their primary responsibility? How many are grade school teachers, where their knowledge of English is still well above those of the students, even though they may have failed the test?
The school district has made passing the test a litmus test of the competency of its employees. I strongly suspect that this is true regardless of how closely it affects their jobs. The Superintendent of Schools is the "head teacher" for the entire district. He should not be exempt.
Posts: 2473 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The Superintendent of Schools is the "head teacher" for the entire district. He should not be exempt."
I agree, and I like your idea of leave without pay. He can give, let's see, at least three teachers and an aide their jobs back.
It is surprising that Mitt Romney does not think the superintendent should be held accountable for this because he doesn't teach the children directly.
He does, however, communicate with the press, with parents, with other superintendents, and with the School Board.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In principle, he certainly should be held to the same requirements. In practice, if he is as good superintendent, it would be folly to fire him based on this, and unfair to suspend his pay.
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If someone is good at something and it shows, surely he doesn't need to prove he can speak English. Obviously things are getting done, and they are getting done well, so why does this person have to prove he can communicate?
I expect to be eaten for saying this, but obviously there is more to this story than tests, because somebody hired this man and someone thought he deserved a raise, regardless of his test scores. Sometimes, tests are not the only way to judge someone.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Teacher : I'm sorry, but you didn't pass the necessary tests to get you diploma. You won't graduate.
Student : But the Superintendant didn't pass the necessary tests. Why does he get to be the highest paid employee when he didn't pass the required tests?
Teacher : Good point. Here's your diploma.
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Sometimes, tests are not the only way to judge someone.
I absolutely agree, but he still should be suspended. Because the school district apparently is using certain tests as the only way they judge teachers, specifically this English test. If failure to pass the English exam is sufficient criteria to suspend a teacher, why not the head of all teachers? Why should the top boss be "dumber" (as measured by this test) than all the teachers he is supervising?
If passing the test doesn't matter, why did he take it in the first place? Posts: 2473 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:If failure to pass the English exam is sufficient criteria to suspend a teacher, why not the head of all teachers? Why should the top boss be "dumber" (as measured by this test) than all the teachers he is supervising?
Because they are performing different roles.
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Because they are performing different roles.
Yes, but don’t they both have to comply with minimum standards?
Of those 24 teachers that were suspended without pay, do you think all of them were English teachers? How many were social sciences, math, or general education (primary school teachers)? In the areas that they failed, how often do you think they used those aspects of the English language in their class? Especially if they were math teachers?
I suspect (since they all passed the written exam—unlike the Superintendent ) that they failed on some relatively minor aspects of the English language; aspects they usually do not use. But the school district believes that they should have a certain minimum competency, regardless of how often they use it. Which is fine.
But then it should apply to administration, too. If there is a standard, all employees should comply with the standard.
If this particular standard does not apply to administration, like the Superintendent, then why did he take the test in the first place? Doesn’t he have better things to do with his time than take a test that does not apply to his job? If he is required to take the test, shouldn’t he be required to pass it, too?
Someone decided that he should take that test. Now that he failed, he should be held to the same standards that everyone in the district is.
Posts: 2473 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just thought I'd add this and see if it makes a difference.
quote: Wilfredo T. Laboy called his failing scores "frustrating" and "emotional." He blamed his performance on a lack of preparation and concentration, as well as the fact that that Spanish is his first language.
"It bothers me because I'm trying to understand the congruence of what I do here every day and this stupid test," Laboy told The Eagle-Tribune of Lawrence in a story published Sunday.
"What brought me down was the rules of grammar and punctuation," Laboy said. "English being a second language for me, I didn't do well in writing. If you're not an English teacher, you don't look at the rules on a regular basis."
posted
The state Board of Education apparently felt that all School Superintendents be capable in their use of spoken and written English. Why shouldn't he be held to that standard since all of the other superintendents are?
Of course, his suspension of non-passing teachers just makes the irony a little on the delicious side.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a difference between expecting a worker to be able to perform a duty with the same proficiency as the Administrator. How many people think that Phil Jackson should be able to shoot 85 percent from the free-throw line before benches Shaq?
The problem this particular test is that we are talking about skills so fundamental to the very purpose of public education and citizenship in American that a better analogy is having a Catholic school principal who doesn't know bible.
See, my father can't pass the California Bar. He moved to the country when he was 25 and his knowledge of the law is as vast as the ocean, and history failing the bar is as old as mankind. He keeps failing and failing and failing. I stopped asking him about it ten years ago, but there is a tacit understanding that I'll pass it before he does. Him failing the bar probably broke up my parent's marriage. Not that solely, but I'll be damned if it didn't factor into the general amount of frustration in the house, especially because money was tight.
Him failing the bar so many times is probably the reason I used to worry about written Standardized Tests, I mean, his blood does flow through my veins, and the most vivid memories I have of him while I was growing up surround that test. Thankfully, I was born here. English is my native language. I do well, but I'm incredibly sympathetic to people who have trouble taking blue book tests because of grammar and confidence in their ability to navigate the written language.
To this day, I can't tell you if my dad actually deserves to be a lawyer. The man has a work ethic that makes me look lethargic(though I don't think he works as smartly as I do), but I don't know if he should be a lawyer because written communication is important in the practice of law and governance, just as written communcation is integral to the rearing of a successful citizen.
The superintendent needs to higher a private tutor. He needs to make improving his written english grammar priority. He needs a few weeks or a month in an intensive program for his own sake and because he is an example to the children.
quote:The superintendent needs to higher a private tutor. He needs to make improving his written english grammar priority. He needs a few weeks or a month in an intensive program for his own sake and because he is an example to the children.
I totally agree. He should do something about it, to show the students that if you're having trouble with something, you find a way to get the help you need, rather than give up or expect someone to change the rules for you.
If English is his second language, then he may need to brush up on his punctuation skills. No shame in that, but he still needs to pass the test.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come to think of it, I haven't found much that says what the teachers in Lawrence are thinking about this.
I do not buy the idea that he should have special consideration because he is an administrator. That bothers me mightily. However, if he has some sort of a written learning disability, which he might have on top of his second language issue, it would be great to see an accomodation or two for him.
Massachusetts passed a law last fall which, literally, outlaws bilingual education. Teachers can be sued for speaking to students in their first language. (tried to find a good link for this, but I stink)
I wonder how many language teachers, who teach French, German, Chinese, whatever, might have difficulty with an oral or written test in English, yet are excellent teachers.
Personally, I don't think there is a good test to find out if someone is a good teacher other than, well, teaching. I almost wish people couldn't be certified without a two year apprentice teacher position. Many prep schools do this. It saves a lot of people time and money who get certified and realize that they really hate teaching.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The test that matters most begins in September, when districts have to be prepared for the switch from the traditional bilingual model -- in which liberal use is made of the students' foreign language -- to English immersion. If districts try to staff immersion classes with English-speaking teachers lacking skills in English as a second language, the districts will fail this test -- and their students."
I had a feeling this all came back to the bilingual issue. It is somewhat ironic to me that a teacher can be sued for teaching in a nonEnglish-speaking child's first language, but has to be able to speak English in order to teach English-speaking students a different language.
Here is Rush Limbaugh's take on it. Apparently, hethe super, not Rush) is going to try to be tutored by Lawrence teachers.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) that they failed on some relatively minor aspects of the English language; aspects they usually do not use. But the school district believes that they should have a certain minimum competency, regardless of how often they use it. Which is fine.![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
