shuggy's blog
Obviously it's a grand idea to sack lousy teachers. The problem is, I assume, identifying them in some way that approximates to accuracy and avoids the whole business becoming a counterproductive exercise in bullying.
I once witnessed a tenured academic being sacked, from an Ancient University, on the grounds that turning up to lecture drunk was not a valid alternative to his other strategy of not turning up at all. But then his students were more or less adults and their complaints had to be taken seriously.
Fuck me -- someone kill dearieme now. Worra boring cunt it is.
It's a tough problem, how to evaluate teachers. I knew of a history teacher who had a weakness for vodka. He was never shit-faced, but the booze helped animate his lectures. He was very knowledgeable, well read.
I had a physics prof in community college for evening classes. He drank whiskey in moderation prior to class and was also quite competent.
Who should evaluate teachers?
There has to be some set of multiple criteria so that the butt-kissers don't always wind up on top.
Top of the morning to you, Will.
In any organisation everyone knows who the useless tossers are. They are the ones doing the evaluating. Doomed.
Seriously, instead of dealing with clear personnel issues with a minority of staff, they invent a procedure that is a monstrous administrative burden on the majority, pisses them off and makes them less effective. In the meantime, the people who should have been dealt with learn how to work the new system so they are untouched by it. Happens all the time.
Commenting by HaloScan
