From in depth conversations in Dallas to casual conversations while traveling around the state, the idea of linking teacher evaluation with student test scores is certainly a "hot topic" these days. Student growth and performance are very important, but to what degree should this determine a teachers evaluation? Does using this narrow scope allow us to only focus on one element of an effective teacher while we miss the holistic view of the teacher? What is the right answer? States such as Florida have already began to make policy strides in this area. LEAs such as Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools have been piloting programs to measure teacher effectiveness. But the question remains: How can we accurately measure the effectiveness of a teacher?
For many, the answer is always "use the test data!" If a student shows growth and proficiency, then the teacher has been effective. But a couple of problems arise when this is used as the primary source to determine teacher effectiveness. First and foremost, do we believe our current assessments measure what we want in student performance? Don't get me wrong, I am a huge advocate for accountability and I am in no way suggesting that we do not test. I am simply stating that some of our standardized tests measure trivia and most measure the lower end of Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT). I blogged earlier (August 3 - A Global Conversation...) about how testing trivia has taught students to "make a dark mark that completely fills the circle" and has unfortunately turned some teachers into "dispensers of fact" rather than facilitators of learning. We are graduating lots of students who can recall fact, but lack the ability to think critically, analyze information and move forward without a "hand-holder." As we move to Common Core standards, our assessments will be reevaluated and it is likely that our new assessments will truly measure student learning rather than a student's ability to retain fact. So in a few years, hopefully testing will be measuring the things we want in our future employees and citizens. But until then are we willing to label a teacher as effective or ineffective based on a testing system that may not measure what is important?
Secondly, in most states, including North Carolina, the majority of our teachers do not teach grades/subjects that are tested. In NC, for example, 65% of our teaching faculty teach non-tested subjects. How then do we create a measure of these teachers that will compare to the testing data used to evaluate tested subjects/grades? Yes, test scores are the responsibility of everyone and our school truly embraces the team approach. I could not teach all that I need to teach about U.S.History, thinking, learning, and analyzing without my amazing friend, co-worker and team teacher, Ronda Jackson (American Literature teacher). We are a team. We plan together. We assess both formatively and summatively with the same goals in mind. Even though we all know she is far more cool, stylish and fabulous than I could ever be, our kids say we are very similar in our instructional style and practices. However, according to current conversations about measuring teacher effectiveness, we would be evaluated with two different tools.
The other argument is throw out testing data altogether. As exciting as this may sound (especially following first semester exams!) I am not convinced this is the answer either. This leaves us with very subjective measures to determine effectiveness. This then becomes the job of the administrative team to determine how effective a teacher is in the classroom and school community. That can then make us question the administration's effectiveness. I have always been fortunate to work for some amazing principals such as Richard Murphy and Stuart Daughtery. If we could ensure that all principals were as effective as these two, then subjective evaluation may not be so concerning. But let's be realistic, we can't ensure that in every building everywhere. I have also had evaluations from assistant principals (not currently working in adminstration - thank goodness) who had more grammatical mistakes in his/her report than my students do in their first draft of a paper. (CLARIFICATION: this only happened once or twice and this particular person is no longer a principal or assistant principal.) So what is the answer? How do we measure teacher effectiveness?
Teaching is both an art and a science. We need data to know and understand where our students are and how to help them grow. We also need to embrace the art of teaching. Teachers have a gift of reaching the unreachable and explaining in mickey mouse terms the unexplainable. To disregard the art of instruction in lei of the scientific data will not give us the big picture.
In order to effectively teach each child, we use data to understand our students, but not to define them. Think of education in terms of preparing runners for a race. It is a given that we want each child to run the race successfully and finish the course. To do this, an outstanding teacher gathers data on the runners’ current condition and begins an individualized training course to ensure each runner’s success. As the unique training begins, we form relationships with our runners so that we truly know who they are and what factors influence their lives the most. As we gain data and develop relationships, we become focused not only on how many runners finish the race, but also on how many runners grew in performance: did this year’s time show improvement? I set high expectations and do not allow mediocre work from my students. I use the available data to know where we begin the race and balance that with the reality of who my students are. It is a balance of art and science.
The general public seems to base accountability solely on standardized test scores and graduation rates. While important, focusing only on this data does not allow the entire picture to be seen. We must modify our current systems and develop a more sophisticated system of accountability. Schools across our state are as different as the students in them. Therefore, our models of accountability must meet the needs of the school the way teachers must meet the needs of his/her students. One of our primary purposes as educators is to ensure that student learning occurs. In order to ensure this is occurring, student achievement gains are important measures of accountability. However, we cannot look at student growth alone. We must look at the educator as a whole in order to create the most effective accountability. Is the educator a leader in the classroom and in the profession? Is the teacher knowledgeable in his/her content area? Does this teacher facilitate learning and embrace diversity?
I know this is a delicate topic and one that has created much dialogue across our state and in many other states as well. As always, I welcome your comments, insight and questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment