The Connecticut B.E.S.T. program is a mentorship and portfolio program that beginning teachers in Connecticut must complete in under three years. In my opinion, this program is one of the more accurate ways to measure teacher quality, but it is not without its flaws or conflicts.
First of all, mentorship is something that is to be organized by the individual districts. More wealthy school districts would pay extra to those teachers who gave mentorship to beginning teachers. Others didn't. As you would expect, in those districts where mentorship was unpaid, very little mentorship actually went on. The truth is, it is difficult to
assign a mentor anyway. A mentor is generally somebody you learn to trust.
That is not what happened between my mentor and I. She actually kind of frightened me. We had two completely different styles of teaching and she didn't know anything about my subject matter. In addition, she retired before my second year, so she wasn't very much help at all.
I've heard of other situations where mentorship was nearly outright denied to a teacher. I have a close friend who's principal decided she was going to take over as a mentor as she didn't have a mentor to assign her. This principal proceeded to write my friend up every time she made a mistake: the mark of a bad mentor. This friend is no longer teaching out of frustration with the bureaucracy.
I went to a B.E.S.T. Training session once at a local high school in Connecticut. During the session we were to watch videos from portfolios that were graded as "exemplary." I remember this one video of a teacher who was teaching in one of the more wealthy school districts in the state. She stood up there awkwardly, often not giving eye contact to the students, staring confused at her lesson plan at times while the children just sat there waiting for her. AND SHE GOT AN EXEMPLARY. I remember thinking that my students would walk all over her, but, because she taught in an easier district to teach in, she would be considered a better teacher than I was. It didn't seem fair.
The B.E.S.T. Program also, sometimes, conflicts with misguided district policies.
In Arts Education we have an acronym that is king above all others: CPR. This stands for the three artistic processes: Create, Perform, and Respond. The idea behind this acronym is that every student, during a lesson in arts education, should be learning how to create, perform, and respond. If your students are not doing these three things then you are not doing your job. Great concept right?
Well, a certain administrator in Waterbury though so, too. But, he completely and utterly misinterpretted or disregarded the point behind CPR. He made it a method for planning lessons for all teachers in the district. In this policy, teachers were required to "create the lesson," "perform the lesson," and then "respond to the lesson." It had absolutely nothing to do with student achievement or higher order thinking skills, which was the original intent of CPR. In fact, it had nothing to do with the students at all! All it really did was increase the length of my lesson plans from about two pages to over five pages for a single lesson. Because I had to spend so much time creating these elaborately worded lesson plans it gave me less time to come up with creative and engaging lessons for my students. In addition, the five page lesson plan ended up being so confusing that I would end up writing a second lesson plan, just for myself, because I couldn't refer to the lesson plan I was required to write and understand what it was I had meant to do. It was a crazy situation.
Now, in the B.E.S.T. Portfolio for music in Connecticut, you are required to show how, through video tapes and lesson plans as well as student work, you covered the concepts of CPR as they are meant to be covered. So, during that same B.E.S.T. session that I described above, I told the state official who was running it what was going on in Waterbury. She said, "Oh, that's not right at all. In fact, for B.E.S.T. I would write separate lesson plans because it might look like you were confused about the subject matter and you'd probably be failed."
So, a district policy in the City of Waterbury was going to make me fail a state certification process, simply because somebody else misread, misunderstood, or completely disregarded the intent behind a method of pedagogy.
When I brought this up to an administrator in Waterbury, this administrator told me to stop whining and just write three different lesson plans for every lesson, though he doubted I would fail my portfolio if I used that type of lesson plan in it. But, the state official, who is also a scorer of these portfolios, said I would! Shouldn't other teachers in the district know this? No. Just stop whining.
I'm going to end this rant with a phrase that I've begun to use over and over again: "It is never the kids. It's always the adults."
Thank goodness I stayed in teaching despite all of this.