This is done by comparing evaluation data year over year to determine whether professional development is
actually improving teacher performance.
Not exact matches
I can confirm that a strict fruitarian diet can certainly lead to low protein levels... as a strict fruitarian for a number of years (2 - 3 I estimate, but
actually 5 if i count the time i ate minimal amounts of salad materials as well...), I had blood tests done at the end of this time and indeed my protein levels were low... Total protein was at 6.5 when the ideal is supposedly 7.5... And apart from this, my sports
performance as judged by my
teachers, was suffering (though I did not feel this in my own body — I was used to performing at that level and felt it as normal for me... and i was newer to the sport than a lot of them... i had great, better than most endurance... which was very satisfying... but apparently I just did not have the physical strength that others with less endurance may have had...) something which immediately
improved as I added more protein to my diet....
The article continued, «Rigorous testing that decides whether students graduate,
teachers win bonuses, and schools are shuttered... does little to
improve achievement and may
actually worsen academic
performance and dropout rates, according to the largest study ever on the issue.»
Weingarten is
actually saying that incompetent and ineffective
teachers should have lots of time and assistance to
improve their classroom
performance.
In other words, being able to rate a
teacher's
performance with increased accuracy does nothing (in itself) to
actually improve that
teacher's
performance.
They fail to provide
teachers and parents with any usable information about how to
improve teaching or student's academic
performance in relation to what is
actually being taught in Connecticut's classrooms.