For the past two months I have been traveling to schools to meet with teachers. I am there to learn what is going well and what is challenging. Predictably, and fairly, the focus of the discussion is on what is not going well. It is clear that the district put a lot of on the teachers’ shoulders this semester. One of the bright spots to emerge from these discussions however, although in a few instances maligned, is our new teacher evaluation system. I know that most recognize the improvement from our old system that made passing value judgments based on cursory classroom observations. By contrast the new system is far more comprehensive and includes rich conversations about student learning. And while the focus on student learning is a seemingly obvious thing to do, it was by and large, secondary from previous evaluation models that mostly focused on technique and classroom management.
Looking ahead, it is likely that the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind will require schools to tie student performance to teacher performance. If this is the case, then our evaluation system will need a new domain. Anyone who has worked in a school knows that there is not a 1:1 relationship between student performance and teacher performance. There are simply too many variables outside of the classroom to make this the case. With that said, we need to expect that student performance will improve. But it would be a mistake to make this judgment by only using the results of the state tests that are given on three days in April. It is important that all of us in education help shape this conversation on how to equate student performance with teacher performance.
Teacher Evaluation and Student Performance
For the past two months I have been traveling to schools to meet with teachers. I am there to learn what is going well and what is challenging. Predictably, and fairly, the focus of the discussion is on what is not going well. It is clear that the district put a lot of on the teachers’ shoulders this semester. One of the bright spots to emerge from these discussions however, although in a few instances maligned, is our new teacher evaluation system. I know that most recognize the improvement from our old system that made passing value judgments based on cursory classroom observations. By contrast the new system is far more comprehensive and includes rich conversations about student learning. And while the focus on student learning is a seemingly obvious thing to do, it was by and large, secondary from previous evaluation models that mostly focused on technique and classroom management.
Looking ahead, it is likely that the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind will require schools to tie student performance to teacher performance. If this is the case, then our evaluation system will need a new domain. Anyone who has worked in a school knows that there is not a 1:1 relationship between student performance and teacher performance. There are simply too many variables outside of the classroom to make this the case. With that said, we need to expect that student performance will improve. But it would be a mistake to make this judgment by only using the results of the state tests that are given on three days in April. It is important that all of us in education help shape this conversation on how to equate student performance with teacher performance.