websites for admin to rate teachers?

[tommypizza]

Are there websites that admin might use to blackball a teacher? I know they can do this through the Search database with the confidential forms but just wondering if there is something else admin uses to talk about different teachers...just kind of a quick reference for admin rather than calling/emailing?

[chiliverde]

That would be horrifying! You only have a few administrators in your life, imagine how much damage a reckless/unprofessional/unhinged one could do. But we don't have any of those in international education, do we?

[wrldtrvlr123]

Yes. Checkout this thread. Especially Walter and Shadowjack's posts on the subject.

https://internationalschoolsreview.com/ ... 4&start=15

[shadowjack]

There is no one-stop clearinghouse. But yes, school heads do talk about teachers of concern. I have had a couple of discussions with heads over the years about this. Does it encompasss every school and head? No. Are teachers thrown onto it willy-nilly? No. Is there room for abuse of the system by an unscrupulous head? Yes.

In regards to that last one, though, heads don't get where they are in many cases by being stupid. Red flags include a head posting too often to the system, or giving 'facts' that just don't add up. At some point, their information becomes suspect, just like that teacher who has so many discipline problems, but it's always the students' fault.

It is never something that has alarmed me and I've been around for awhile.

[PsyGuy]

No, there is no global clearinghouse or blacklist, there is no oracle nor "red phone". About the closest there is is a few messages that get posted each year on the forums at AISH, which is a site much like this with a membership of a few hundred leadership. The messages are typically in the format of "If anyone is talking to or recruiting X candidate than please contact me." Then the message gets archived over time and fades away.

Actually they cant do this through a premium agency unless you let them. Leadership cant force a reference be sent to them without your involvement. An IS that tried to do so, such as submitting a letter directly to an associate/consultant either wouldnt be added or at the worst may result in the agency dropping the IT from being repped. There is no benefit to an agency making an IT unmarketable, its work for the agency and isnt likely to result in generating revenue.

@SJ

There is plenty of stupid in IE leadership, what are all the reviews on the member side evaluations just fictional reading? No.

[Thames Pirate]

To those who actually know something--

How often do "he's a troublemaker" or "agitator" or "bad for staff unity" type warnings about staff show up on these boards? How do you interpret those types of comments?

[PsyGuy]

@Thames Pirate

They dont, the messages on AISH for example are almost all neutral "If anyone is interviewing or working with or negotiating with X IT please contact me at Y to discuss" types of messages. They arent like the evaluations or reviews on the member side of this site. Again, its a few a year among a couple of hundred members, they arent aggregated or anything, and ike this forum fade away. There is no blacklist or global chain letter.

[Thames Pirate]

Thanks, but I was asking people in the know.

[PsyGuy]

@Thames Pirate

Thats why I posted, I only post from experience or reliable and trusted sources.

[Thames Pirate]

Again, thanks, but I was asking people actually in the know. Not people who claim to know things from "trusted sources" since we all have "trusted sources" and I don't trust your sources.

There aren't many admin on this site, and I think the other thread gave me all the answers I can reasonably expect. If anyone else has real, reliable answers, I am of course still interested.

[PsyGuy]

@Thames Pirate

Again, thats why I posted. I only post from actual (in the know) experience, and reliable trusted resources, thus real and reliable responses.
Everyones claims are claims.

[sid]

It’s rare. And in my experience, has been relatively moderate in tone.
Admin types know who is trustworthy. If you’re being disparaged by an idiot, it could even be a point in your favor. I’ve taken extra interest in some candidates who were leaving schools I knew to be crappy, which I took as a sign of wisdom to be confirmed in interview.
But yes, if certain respected names have taken against you, it will be hard to get a good job.
Rare.

[JDK]

As someone who has been on the teaching side and now the admin side for close to ten years, I absolutely would not want to see a site for rating teachers. The bottom line is that going into leadership means you are responsible for much more, and should be held accountable for it. Contrastingly, teachers have one primary task: helping students learn. There may be any number of reasons why someone may not succeed in that, whether it's a lack of support, poorly communicated expectations or simply being a poor fit for the school's culture (which raises the question of how they were hired to begin with).

Are there a few cases in which a teacher may simply be toxic? Sure. One person who wrote a review of my previous school on ISR neglected to mention that he was taking medication for bipolar (both during the interview and when posting), and that he openly told other staff members he picked fights with that "conflict is the spice of life." But I'm inclined to think those individuals are not the norm, and that most simply don't mesh well with a particular school. It's no reason to put a black mark next to their name that would potentially ruin their career.

In respect to what is shared, I've very rarely ever seen a teacher named in any context. It almost always comes out if and when there is a phone call to get a reference, and even then it's usually diplomatic.

[Thames Pirate]

Thank you. That is more or less what I expected as I find most admin (and competent teachers) diplomatic in their approach to conflicting values/interests/personalities/whatever.

I actually think a site for admin to exchange information on truly problematic teachers--ones who pull runners, who pose a danger to students, who falsify credentials or references, etc.--is not a bad thing. The danger is admin upset over something like a less-than-stellar review or some personality clash that has little to do with teaching children to abuse such a forum. Since it sounds like that is not the case and that admin generally approach such a forum with diplomacy, I have no problems with it.

My concern was that teachers who advocated for more pay, for example, or ones who advocated new policies or programs for staff or students, could get into trouble for being outspoken, even if they work at a reputable school. If leadership feels threatened by new ideas, those individuals could become targets. That would be a real shame because it could shut down legitimate dialogue from teachers with new ideas and the outspokenness to make changes that could work to the benefit of students or to any conversations which indicate a difference in vision for a school. I am glad that does not seem to be the case.

Thanks for your insights, admin folks!

[sid]

Honestly, I’ve never seen that sort of thing, bashing someone for being a squeaky wheel. As said above, leaders are usually more diplomatic and have bigger fish to fry. The typical admin attitude is that someone who is good in the classroom gets a ton of leeway to be less than awesome with other things that don’t matter as much.