A significant change to education in Alaska was made yesterday when the state board approved regulations that will guide the evaluation of teachers and principals. Included in these regulations is the requirement that evidence of student learning will be a component of the evaluations. That is, a student’s performance on assessments will be one of the ways to determine a teacher’s or principal’s effectiveness. There is a lot of concern that this new component of evaluation may unfairly cast teachers or principals as not doing a good job. While the move to measure a teacher’s effectiveness has been gaining momentum for the past several years, it really started in 2002 when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was reauthorized as No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
NCLB stated that all students will learn. The act boldly set 2014 as the year when every student in the United States would be proficient in reading, writing and math. NCLB shifted the role of school as one that David Porter, formerly at UAF, stated as presenting students with an opportunity to learn to one that requires universal competence. Herein lies the issue for educators. Some argue that if schools do their part and offer students the best possible opportunity to learn, then they have satisfied their purpose. Others don’t feel that this is not enough, that without the expectation of universal competence, schools will not go the extra mile for students. There are numerous variables that affect student learning. My sense is that if the school does all that it can to affect those variables over which it has some control, then the opportunity to learn will be met. In the past, a teacher evaluation system measured how well a teacher prepared and delivered lessons. Starting in 2015 the system will also include how well a student performs.
This entry was posted in Schools and Assessment. Bookmark the
permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can .
Opportunity to learn and universal competence
A significant change to education in Alaska was made yesterday when the state board approved regulations that will guide the evaluation of teachers and principals. Included in these regulations is the requirement that evidence of student learning will be a component of the evaluations. That is, a student’s performance on assessments will be one of the ways to determine a teacher’s or principal’s effectiveness. There is a lot of concern that this new component of evaluation may unfairly cast teachers or principals as not doing a good job. While the move to measure a teacher’s effectiveness has been gaining momentum for the past several years, it really started in 2002 when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was reauthorized as No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
NCLB stated that all students will learn. The act boldly set 2014 as the year when every student in the United States would be proficient in reading, writing and math. NCLB shifted the role of school as one that David Porter, formerly at UAF, stated as presenting students with an opportunity to learn to one that requires universal competence. Herein lies the issue for educators. Some argue that if schools do their part and offer students the best possible opportunity to learn, then they have satisfied their purpose. Others don’t feel that this is not enough, that without the expectation of universal competence, schools will not go the extra mile for students. There are numerous variables that affect student learning. My sense is that if the school does all that it can to affect those variables over which it has some control, then the opportunity to learn will be met. In the past, a teacher evaluation system measured how well a teacher prepared and delivered lessons. Starting in 2015 the system will also include how well a student performs.