Teacher Evaluation

This morning I was cleaning out my Google Reader. I often leave my education postings to the weekend, not wanting to burn myself out on education during the week (between 7am-5pm, and twitter postings, it can be a bit much). One post I found today (from Dan Meyer) was a link to a Washington Post article on teacher evaluation. Teacher evaluation is a huge topic of discussion, particularly because of the documentary Waiting for Superman. In a nutshell, the discussion post-WFS has dealt with "bad teachers" and how to get rid of them. That doesn't even go into where "good teachers" come from, or where the line of teachers to replace the bad teachers is. Alas I digress.

The Washington Post article was difficult to read. I cringed a few times as I was reading, particularly as the evaluation wrapped up. The teacher had adjusted to meet the needs of his kids, but it appeared from the article that his lesson was flawed from the get-go. There are many blanks, largely because it is a reporter, the evaluator, and the teacher. Evaluation is objective, which is what scares people. If you don't get along with someone then they might be prejudiced in their evaluation of the teacher. The article showed that the teacher cared about his kids, but didn't clearly show if his planning set him up for effective instruction. I wonder a little bit why he moved from showing the commutative process to place value. Wouldn't you already have an idea about place value issues through some pre-assessment? It seemed a little curious to me.

The article made me think about teacher evaluation in my district. Administrators have a pre and post evaluation meeting with you to accompany your observation. This goes along with a summative meeting at the end of the year. Administrators gather where your lesson fits in your instructional plan, why you are doing it, and how you'll instruct to meet the needs of your kids. If you alter your instruction you can discuss why you made that change, and what signalled why that change should be made. Is there a chance that bias or prejudice comes the process? Sure, we are human beings. Do I know if it happens? I can only speak for my own experience, which I judge to have been very fair thus far (so no, it has not happened to me or someone I know of). I also operate under the premise that I am going to be judged fairly, not worrying about the emotion tied to evaluation. There isn't an expectation that you are perfect, but you definitely need to know what you are doing. You need to be thinking about the evidence that will speak to the effectiveness of you instruction. But shouldn't you already be doing that?

We are in an objective profession. We aren't perfect.

Wait for it...

There is a post from over at NYC Schools Parents that is worth the read. The long and short of it is that many facts were used, and re-used in Waiting for Superman. Those facts weren't entirely vetted to ensure quality- or perhaps they were, but used anyway. The end result is a gross misrepresentation of public school teachers in reference to other professions (namely lawyers and doctors).

Don't get me wrong, there are many districts in need of help, support, and reform. Data is one way to show that. But, numbers can be used in a myriad of ways to prove the point you want to make. Even embedded in the post above is an extrapolation that says public school teaching is on par with the attrition rates of the other professions (which I'm not sure has been fully vetted). The point in all of this is that when we use data to draw conclusions, we best be sure our data is accurate. Even more important is the need for discussion about the data, and the reasons for it. Instead we've had a really vitriolic reaction on both sides with no end in sight (one angry about the system and saying blow it up while the other is equally angry for being villianized sans-debate).

Superman?

My focus is constantly divided. I'm always thinking about my classroom/school/district, and how successful they are (how successful they can be). But I am also looking at the bigger education picture, which currently seems to be dominated by the Waiting for Superman documentary. You can also toss in the Oprah show from this past week (I'm not home when Oprah is on, so I go based on the twitter-sphere) or the NBC "Education Nation" show that is kicked off by Sunday's Meet the Press.

As a point of full disclosure: I teach in a public school, but in a district that is more affluent (and successful) than other large "city" districts in the state. I also have a friend that is a principal for KIPP, a charter school outfit that gets lots of publicity. Lastly, I have never set foot inside of a charter school.

As I watch my DVR'd copy of Meet the Press, I find myself getting increasingly irritated. The conversation is essentially centered on the fact that public schools are "failures" and that the teacher's union is an impediment to student success. What is befuddling, but not surprising, is that they haven't defined success! Is a student's success defined by the winner take all standardized test? On this show, and in many arenas, the answer is yes. It is assumed by all of those on the show, that input equals output, and a student passing the standardized test should be the output. My problem is that it doesn't always work that way. I've seen really bright and hardworking kids not meet standard. Why? I couldn't tell you. Bad day? A family thing? Missed breakfast? Poor teaching? A combination? Who knows. There are kids who miss things everyday in my classroom (forgetting a topic sentences, miss reading a question, overcomplicating a question). They are not any less bright because of that. Perhaps they need to me more careful, but not any more/less intelligent.

As the show concludes before me, I find myself exceedingly angry. Not surprisingly the panel took aim at teachers and the union as an impediment, blocking the progress of millions of school children across the country. "I fire bad teachers, and the union files a grievance," Michelle Rhee states. Well because I would be willing to bet that not all of the 241 teachers that were terminated were "bad teachers." The unfortunately reality is that their kids didn't meet the growth relative to the standardized test.

Solutions? Dan Brown mentioned a few (which the Radical quotes in a post about the show). In my district I feel like there are some items that are worth replicating. Our New Teacher Support Program is highly effective, and inspires reflective practice. During my first year we had quarterly cohort meetings, weekly observed lessons (informal), and opportunities to observe inspiring teachers in the district. Additionally, we have an online portal where documents related to teaching and learning can be found. Wondering what district assessments should be used for fall? Check the portal and download it. Wondering what is at standard for fluency in the winter? Check the portal. Want to see the scope and sequence that the district proposes for particular curricular materials? The portal has it. The tools are available, and you are expected to use them and not be on an island.

The last two things are crucial. How about an hour and a half for planning every week (beyond your specialist time)? Love it. You mean I have time to look at student work, talk about it with my peers, and collaborate on how to scaffold for particular students? Whoa. It was striking at first, but some of the most important time we have. Lastly we have an evaluation system aimed at our growth. I set a goal for a particular domain of teaching (last year was classroom environment, this year is instruction) aimed at increasing student achievement. The achievement can be measured in many ways, but I do link it to our standardized test. We use them for our grade level and school goals, so it is best to be aligned. But I can see where I am, and speak to the evidence that shows I am proficient in a particular area.

Solutions exist. They are being done in schools across the country. Firing teachers in favor of the charter schools that educate 3% of our nation's kids is foolish without first exploring what innovative districts are already doing.