“Hard-Working Teachers, Sabotaged When Student Test Scores Slip” is an article by Michael Winerip published on March 4, 2012. The article explicates how some teachers’ efforts to ensure the success of their students were disrupted by the performance ratings of the New York City Educational Department.The article commences with providing different credentials that these elementary school teachers possess, which according to the author, fit for college professors. Despite the fact that students’ scores at the end of the year significantly contributed to a teacher’s rating, Winerip (2012) comments that the rating provided by the Educational Department was more of a way of demoralizing the teachers who had worked hardly. Thus, Winerip (2012) expresses the opinion that the figures given to denote the teachers’ contribution was not a true reflection of their real work. Winerip (2012) also notes the contentious issue related to teachers’ scores, which is the fact that they determine whether a teacher is retained or dismissed. Thus, this forced teachers at the elementary school to adopt new ways of ensuring that students do successfully in their studies. However, this is met by outcries from students who do not understand why teachers sometimes go behind the accepted curriculum. At the same time, education officials consent on not making teachers’ results public as this could affect significantly the general opinion about how they carry out their duties.
I agree with Winerip’s article because his research brings to the fore the truth regarding teachers’ score. Winerip’s focus on certain elementary teachers in New York is astonishing. It shows how their hard-work and contribution were not actually reflected in the results provided by the Education Department. This proves the fact that the teachers’ results are either doctored or not computed well. The results also raise a valid question whether it is right for the teachers’ performance to be measured on the basis of a student’s achievements or other factors should be incorporated.
The fact that the credentials of the five elementary school teachers did not correspond to their performance really surprised me. It is amazing to go through the teachers’ credentials, as provided by Winerip in the article, only to find at the end that the teachers faced a possible dismissal based on their performance.
I do not think Winerip exaggerated the issue. The first reason that supports my opinion is the fact that the Education Department consented to not making teachers’ performance results public. This means that Winerip did not overblow the issue because the department must have also noted the teachers’ hard-work and not announcing the results was the only way to avoid students’ and parents’ pressure. Secondly, Winerip did not exaggerate the issue as he hinted at some other possible factors that might contribute to the teachers’ low score in the assessment. They include the fact that some students overwork at home and do not get sufficient time for doing their hometask or revising.
In conclusion, Winerip’s article raises a question of present interest regarding the performance of elementary teachers. The article examines how some elementary teachers have amazing credentials, but the rating provided by the Education Department does not correspond to them. Winerip gives examples of the teachers’ hard work which make me agree with his position. In addition, the fact that the Education Department decided not to make the teachers’ scores public also adds validity to Winerip’s article. It means that the Department does not want to be responsible for indignation of parents and students concerning the mode of teaching that educators adopt. So we can see that Winerip presents the problem objectively.