The idea of teacher quality has become topical, particularly with regard to regional exam performance, and the performance of students internally. This is connected to discussions about the way teachers are trained and the results they get, which affect the image of their schools. Parents who can afford it send their children to schools they feel have quality teachers, since exam results determine further education and job possibilities.
The issue of teacher quality is explored by Dr. Carol Gentles, of the School of Education UWI. She says in an article in the Jamaica Observer captioned "Teacher quality matters" that principals lecture and inspire their staff and students to work hard and commit to improving exam results, but little will change, because not enough is done to improve teachers' effectiveness and efficiency.
She adds that many teachers are not teaching in ways that produce learning outcomes students need for the job market, providing statistics showing 45 percent of the teaching students receive was ineffective, and evidence indicating teachers are off-task 40 minutes a day. The lecturer notes that students are eager to learn, but poor teaching does not enable them to get their desired results.
I think that to inspire staff and students to work hard and improve results is an exhortation to enhance effectiveness and efficiency, using multiple strategies. When individuals are inspired, they see things differently and devise innovative means of dealing with issues. So when principals lecture and inspire, they provide a sense of mission and encourage teamwork to resolve any challenges to producing learning outcomes students require for the job market.
When Gentles says little will change because enough is not being done, she underestimates the power of position to exhort through inspiration. Saying little will change blocks efforts to making it happen.
When Gentles alleges that many teachers are not teaching in ways that produce learning outcomes students need for the job market, and produces statistics to support her claim that 45 percent of the teaching students receive was ineffective, and provides research evidence indicating teachers are off-task 40 minutes a day, to me nothing here relates to poor teaching.
Not producing learning outcomes required by the job market is not evidence of ineffective teaching, but an absence of policy and curriculum geared to producing these outcomes.
But what are the characteristics of the job market? Can we know precisely which jobs require what learning outcomes or training? Job market suggests knowing existing jobs, and what is required to access them. Some establishments have in-house training and required competencies which suit their needs, of which teachers have little awareness.
The job market is so volatile that different occupations emerge even within jobs. So what is involved in producing learning outcomes to fit the job market, when most teachers have no job experience outside the classroom?
And what does ineffective teaching imply here? Is it that learning barely occurs? If this is the case, what does this say of the subjects and their relevance to students' interest or experience? Is it that the system is designed to benefit a small percentage of its clients, and when this is satisfied it is effective, while for those not catered for it is seen as ineffective?
Do teachers being off-task mean they are engaged in activities not germane to their jobs? Is it not so that everything that happens in an educational setting benefits the process? Is a teacher photocopying information for class, being off-task? Would students not learn anyway because of technology? Is not learning acquired so that students learn despite the teacher, or poor teaching? So does teacher quality matter?
Gentles then states that many teachers feel unsupported, and some challenges they face are poor leadership, lack of resources, insufficiently developed instructional competencies, and lack of time to think about improving them, resulting in poor teaching and poor student achievement.
But are not teachers educational leaders, who could develop strategies to manage these issues competently? Is this not what teacher quality is about, and where it matters?
She concludes that ineffective and inefficient teaching is a challenge to be addressed nationally and the job of demanding policies be implemented is that of the public. Further, the education sector has to ensure the issue of poor quality teaching is the focus of national conversation and the attention of business directed to understanding the value of investment in teacher training.
To me this is not a strategy to deal with poor teaching, but a raising of consciousness about the issue. It does not appear Gentles has given any professional solutions to the issue of ineffective teaching that would make quality teaching matter.
For this to be so, professional and academic benchmarks must be established based on a concept of effective teaching and what it entails. Training and education should be linked, and a graduated system of what constitutes success implemented so that no student is left behind.
Mentorship and coaching should be stressed and a rewards system created as an incentive. Further, what about using experiences of effectively communicating skills from business and industry? And forming a group of teachers to research effective approaches to ineffective teaching linked to the local culture.
Would this not demonstrate that teacher quality really matters, and make a difference?
o Oliver Mills is a former lecturer in education at the University of the West Indies Mona Campus. He holds an M.Ed degree from Dalhousie University in Canada, an MA from the University of London and a post-graduate diploma in HRM and training, University of Leicester. He is a past permanent secretary in education with the government of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Published with the permission of Caribbean News Now.
Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian
