I was asked by someone in the press for my thoughts on teacher evaluation, probably because of my previous posts on Merit Pay (I’m not for it) and the Value that Teachers Add to the Classroom (hint, it’s more than just test scores).
I haven’t written about the subject in some time and my views are constantly changing. My idea of having teachers gather around a campfire and write down the name of one teacher they’d like to vote of the island hasn’t been picking up any steam so here are my other thoughts.
1. What do you think of the recent national push to tie teacher evaluations to student test scores?
The national push to tie teacher evaluations to test scores is largely a successful attempt by both political parties to draw attention away from vast income disparities among populations and place the burden of poverty on the backs of teachers. In the 70’s and early 80’s the achievement gap had been closing because of national anti-poverty efforts. Now we accept poverty and a shrinking middle class as a given and expect teachers to pick up the slack.
That said, currently test scores currently play no part in evaluation and I believe they could be used as a small piece of the complex evaluation puzzle.
2. How does your school currently evaluate teachers?
Teacher evaluations in California are governed by the Stull Act which demands at least one teacher observation a pass/fail write up of the lesson, and both a pre and post teacher conference. For a negative Stull, the teacher must be observed multiple times and has to be given warning of their negative rating.
3. As an experienced educator, how often would you like to be evaluated, and what do you think the assessment should consist of?
I believe that teachers are the best evaluator of other teachers. Contrary to public opinion, there aren’t that many bad teachers out there…but there are a few. Teachers know who those bad teachers are. If teachers had the power to identify those bad teachers I think they would do a very good job of it. Their definition of “bad” would not simply involve test scores but would also include such things as collegiality and collaboration and take into account a teacher’s rapport with their students.
An ideal evaluation system would involve the input of other teachers, administrators, and parents in a system of checks and balances.
Test scores could be considered in evaluation but should be no more than 10-20% of the consideration. I know teachers with high test scores who do nothing to foster a love of learning; I would not want my own children (once they’re born) in their classroom. I know other teachers with lower test scores who nurture and challenge students but don’t teach to the test; their students are learning but it doesn’t quite translate to a multiple choice test.
I am absolutely not in favor of tying test scores to teacher compensation. The problem in education is that we often don’t know what works. There’s no evidence that poor teachers would teach better if only they were paid more. There is evidence that good teachers under stress aren’t so good. Creating a system whereby teachers don’t know whether or not they’re able to take care of their families in a given year based on their student’s performance would create stress and likely harm teaching. Pay teachers more overall and you could attract and retain better teachers and increase accountability across the board.
Please help me to continue to revise my thinking on the subject. If you have comments, post them below.
Mathew Needleman
Mathew Needleman, Apple Distinguished Educator and Google Certified Innovator has been pioneering the use of instructional technology for over two decades. He has been a classroom teacher, literacy coach, conference keynoter, and he currently serves as an elementary school principal in Los Angeles, California. He is the founder of the independent education studio, Needleworks Pictures.
Well said. Let’s hope many outside of our profession will read and consider your well written position on this matter.