An educator from the nation's largest school district offered up several detailed explanations or excuses, depending on your point of view, on why test scores had not shown any growth the last few years. When asked about the scores he stated: "What I mean by that is when you want to break these things down, you really want to look with a sort of much finer tool than simply say, well, you either pass or didn't pass." When asked about lack of growth related to passing rates he explained that students may not have passed, but their test scores still went up and that these increases aren't reflected on a simple passing rate statistic.
Sounds like more excuses from a unionized, tenured teacher... well, not exactly. These statements were made by Joel Klein, the retiring Chancellor of New York City Schools, in an NPR interview. One of Mr. Klein's major initiatives as chancellor was teacher accountability. What do you think he used for evaluating teachers? You guessed it: standardized test scores!
Evidently, when it comes to evaluating his effectiveness, simple test scores aren't adequate.
Mr. Klein is absolutely right! Mr. Klein's statements echo one of the major concerns teachers have with focusing only on test scores: the data doesn't tell the entire story.
Many of the reforms being implemented (Race to the Top, etc.) state that accountability should encompass more than just standardized test scores, but in practice teachers and schools are being evaluated by only one measure: standardized tests. These tests measurement basic skills in only two subjects, yet these are what we use to deem students, teachers, and schools as effective or ineffective.
If we hope to truly create a world class educational system we must have accountability. This accountability must extend to all administrators as well, but that's a discussion for another time.
The question is not if, but how teachers should be evaluated. The current trend is based solely on test scores and as Mr. Klein pointed out, these scores don't paint a complete picture. Standardized testing should be one of criteria, not THE criteria.
Many administrators and politicians don't want to invest the time and energy necessary to design and implement a comprehensive system of evaluation for educators. In his book, Grading Education, Richard Rothstein states that the reason why we have gotten accountability wrong is that we wanted to do accountability on the cheap.
Teaching is a multifaceted job full of complexity. Shouldn't we evaluate teacher effectiveness in a similar fashion? We need a multidimensional measurement.
Teacher evaluations should include the following:
1. Observations
The current system is not adequate. My principal is aware of what is going on in my class, but as it relates to effective teaching practices, we need more observations. Effective observations would focus on effective instructional practices. These observations would be the basis for training and/or coaching to improve the teacher's effectiveness. We need to have evaluators/coaches that are equipped to properly evaluate and coach teachers (England has trained evaluators who observe teachers).
2. Standardized Testing
Standardized testing is a valuable tool in assessing teacher effectiveness as well as student needs. In order to limit other variables, the testing data should include multiple years. This data will not be limited to the individual teacher's test data. It would also include scores from that teacher's entire grade level. This would encourage collaboration and not competition. Competition among teachers is detrimental to successful schools.
3. Student Portfolios
A rubric should be developed to evaluate the work completed in class by students. An emphasis should be placed on skills that standardized tests do not assess. Attributes such as creative and critical thinking skills should be paramount on the list. Student created work, including group work, is a vital part of authentic learning. Thus, it needs to be part of how we evaluate teachers.
4. Peer Assessment
Teachers work closely together and we are able to provide accurate input on our peers. The assessment has to be designed to focus on teaching practices, not personal compatibility or likability.
5. Contribution Index
Many teachers impact their schools beyond their classroom walls. These teachers provide leadership (often with no compensation) that is invaluable to the school, other teachers, and the students. They may be grade level leaders, mentors, technology leaders, etc. Effective teachers don't work in a vacuum.
6. Community Assessment
This assessment would have to be carefully designed to prevent a popularity contest. Similar to the use of standardized tests, the data would include multiple years to limit the effects of outliers. This information would provide valuable feedback to the teacher.
A comprehensive assessment will not only give us a better understanding of teacher effectiveness, it will also provide us with an important tool for improvement. These evaluations would identify strengths and weaknesses and these would be used to create a written plan with goals for improvement for the teacher. If a teacher is rated as ineffective they will be placed on an improvement plan.
I'm afraid we will settle for the quick and easy road to accountability. This is a huge disservice to our students. It also demeans the contributions of educators who sacrifice time, talent, and treasure to improve the lives of students across our nation. A one-dimensional approach to evaluating teachers/schools will have an adverse affect on education.
This is only one piece of the pie when it comes to improving schools. Unfortunately many are treating it like it's the whole pie. All areas of education including lesson design, teaching strategies, curriculum, administrative functions, etc. all need to be examined and updated to meet the challenges we face in education.
We have to have to get it right or we will continue to struggle in our attempts to improve education.
Remember, force teachers to show outputs according to a formula, and the victims will be the kids' with ruined educational careers.
He is frustrated because the school system he attended offered pre-algebra and geometry in middle school. The system he teaches in does not, so he has Juniors and Seniors in Algebra who are four years behind his experience.
Whose fault is this? The parent's of the school system or the math department of the school system?
Secondly, I now have a son who is a high school math teacher. His qualifications: he has a degree in math, took a certification test and was hired as a teacher. HE AS NEVER TAKEN ONE CLASS ON HOW to teach. He was monitored monthly his first year as a teacher which was helpful, but now that he is in his second year of teaching that mentoring is no longer available.
I speak to him about his experience and already he is reciting the mantra "Parents, need to be more responsible about their kids' education" He even went so far as to say parents need to sit down and teach themselves algebra and calculus so they could help their kids.
He did not take kindly to me telling him that he chose the JOB of teaching math not the parents.
Also, he did not take kindly to me be outraged that he didn't know how the state he lives in funds public schools. Nor did he know the name of the State Superintendent.
For goodness sakes, I worked for Meijer's at one time and I had to watch a mind numbing documentary about the founders of that store.
Perhaps when teachers are required to know the history of the system they are working for they will be more effective.
Making the child do homework is "parenting," not teaching.
The parents chose the LIFE of raising another human to be successful, not the teacher.
I applaud your professionalism, your caring, and the time you've spent coming up with a system of accountability. It's almost perfect -- and that's the problem. Perfection is not possible -- and near perfection isn't either without the necessary resources -- in this case, time and personnel. My district is actually doing something very similar to what you suggest. My high school of 2000 students has 1 principal and 2 assistant principals, one down from last year. Other high schools in the state have 4-6 AP's under one principal, and perhaps they are able to handle the load. But to expect 3 administrators to have the time to constantly be in classrooms observing is absurd. Teachers are now spending their time documenting that they're doing what they're doing -- instead of planning good lessons. Professionals do not need to be evaluated to this level of accountability. Principals need to spend the majority of their time on new teachers and mediocre teachers. If principals give them a pass, the principal needs to be held accountable. Let's avoid complex solutions to our problems. Let's keep things simple.
theschoolprincipal@inthetrencheswithschoolreform.com
www.inthetrencheswithschoolreform.com
In industry the floor or operating people know if they product fails they will lose their place of work and so does the lead manager. This places a team spirit and the team does not want losers so the people who do not want to work, who are always known by the team, will eventually leave the operation.
Lets create and measure teams based on the standardized tests.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/guest-bloggers/how-to-evaluate-students-look.html
There are many things we can do to improve education in this country - improving accountability of teachers and administrators is one of them. There are some bad teachers "teaching" every day in this country - do you want your kids taught by them? Also, there are some exceptionally good teachers out there - let's identify them and use them as models to help others improve!