| TEA says lesson planning interferes with teaching time |
|
By: BO BRADSHAW, TNNS
|
Posted: Tuesday, October 4, 2011 10:18 am
|
Email Print
|
NASHVILLE - A week after the Obama administration announced a sweeping overhaul of the No Child Left Behind act, the Tennessee Education Association (TEA) says the state's Race-to-the-Top teacher evaluation system needs come fine tuning as well. The Race to the Top is a national federal program in which state school system compete for funds. Many districts across the state have implemented new lesson plan requirements asking teachers to provide detailed minute-by-minute lesson plans for each class they teach. TEA president Gera Summerford says teachers are becoming frustrated as the new requirements are interfering with their ability to teach. "It's not directly related at this point to the things that they think would best improve instruction in the classrooms." Summerford says the burdensome, detailed planning is not a requirement by the Race to the Top Act or the State Board of Education. That's causing even more confusion among teachers. She says the new time requirement is unsustainable, interferes with teaching, and will ultimately lead to lower test scores because teachers have less time to devote to grading, providing effective feedback to pupils, and communicating with parents. She says it's important that districts understand that the expectations are sapping the energy that teachers should be devoting to activities that truly affect children's learning. "We've got to make sure that the time that they're being asked to spend is reasonable and not so excessive, and that it is connected to something they know will be productive." Summerford notes that even the most experienced and accomplished teachers are feeling frustration and undue stress as they try to meet the demands of the new evaluation system. She adds that the TEA is asking the Commissioner of Education and directors of schools across the state to clarify their expectations regarding lesson planning, adding that a detailed lesson plan is no substitute for good teaching. |
|