There are so many errors in this article that I don't know where to begin.
First, kids are tested at the beginning of the year. That's
right, teachers get judged on a student's grasp of what last year's
teacher taught, plus the time off for summer and then the addition of students
who didn't even study at that school. The scores don't get back to
the school until the end of the year. The kids are tested before the teacher
has spent much time with them, and the evaluation doesn't reach the
classroom until the year is almost over. Politicians on both sides
of the aisle are destroying education. The media and the public are being
persuaded by propaganda against public education. There is no profession that
is so maligned as are teachers. DN never reports anything good about public
education, unless it is about sports. Shame.
If my pay as a teacher (and I have been one for over a decade) was tied to how
well students perform in the classroom and on assignments, the first thing I
would do is test each student, establish their ability to help me make my
assessment goals, cut those students loose who could make the grade, then focus
on those who can. Survival of the fittest seems to work in the real world and
apparently in the classroom as well.
The reality is that students are all different. If I teach an honors group, and
move them from an 80% average to 90%, how does that compare to the teacher that
takes a remedial group from 30% to 55%? The remedial class is still failing, but
that's an amazing job of teaching. Not to mention, after 20 years of
teaching, I have yet to see two groups respond the same to any technique I have
used. Believe me, you don't want the teacher that scores the observation
perfectly, what you want is the teacher that can figure your child out and
provide a way for them to learn. No one has figured out how to measure that.As for the Sage tests... it will be interesting to see how that plays
out. Kids are spending an awful lot of time testing. Some groups are reporting
6-7 hours just for the writing portion.I just hope someone produces
a book for 9th grade math before the core changes again, as it has every 4-5
years in my experience.
If students were only widgets...But if they were you might find in a
class a widget that is pregnant, a widget that just broke up with his boyfriend
and couldn't care less about the test, a widget that was sexually molested
the night before by a family member, a widget worried about being bullied by
others, a widget that doesn't test well but could show what he learned in a
different way, a widget worried about his state baseball game coming up later in
the day, a widget that has to work eight hours after school is over so he can
help his family pay rent, a widget whose parents are never home because they are
working three jobs and thus don't have the energy or time to help the
widget with his homework, a widgets that have learning disabilities, perhaps
several widgets that just moved into the country recently and don't speak
English, a widget that spent all night playing video games, a widget that
worries more about her social status and texts nonstop in class rather than
staying on task.Then there is the issue that not all widget
factories are equal.
"Among the key observations in the Brookings report is that student test
scores play a relatively small role in teacher evaluations"
"the study found that only 22 percent of the teachers are evaluated even
partially based on test scores"."We find unions drawing the
line on value added, we find litigation over it" "Overall,
the Brookings report offered hard evidence that merit-based teaching
evaluations, though imperfect, are statistically valid and much more valuable
than older measures using paper credentials"Its laughable that
teachers and unions don't wan't student test scores ie "value
added" to be part of the evaluation. That's my main gripe. If someone
makes widgets, they are judged on how well and how efficient they make widgets.
Teachers teach and should be partially evaluated by the "value added"
ie how much students learned. A study has shown that the difference between the
very top teachers and the very bottom teachers is a full acedemic year of
learning in one acedemic year. I don't want my kids to lose a year.I agree, administrators should focus on helping new teachers develop and
helping struggling teachers and much less on proven teachers.
cmsense:You talk about the outliers. Are these the kids that sluff
non-stop not to take the test and then when finally found take a whopping 20
minutes to do the test? I'm sure teachers want to be evaluated on these
test results. As I said before, and maybe I wasn't clear enough, UNLESS
STUDENTS ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, teachers should not be held accountable.Plus as Fred pointed out, teachers have always been evaluated, will
continually be evaluated and so forth. But the instrument proposed is faulty on
many levels. Administrators will simply be overwhelmed as will teachers by what
is proposed to go into effect in Utah in two years. This will not help
education get better for our students but will make things worse. Worf is
right, evaluations are overused right now (they should be done with the majority
of teachers every 2-3 years with the focus of yearly evaluations being on the
new teachers and teachers deemed struggling. Anything else is a waste of time
and resources. We need our administrators to do many things including
disciplining students and meeting with parents and not doing unneeded
evaluations and non-stop paperwork.
@cmsense:Some teachers are friends with the evaluator, and will be
rated good no matter what.If you're not liked, it could be a
bad evaluation, no matter what.Look at our country with its
thousands of laws. No matter what you do, you're breaking one of themTeacher evaluations are lengthy, and if an appraiser doesn't like
you, they can find something to mark you down with. This does happen often.This does add stress while lowering teacher performance.Evaluations are way over used for both teachers, and students.
@ FreddMy father was a teacher and retired as a school principal.
My sister was a teacher and is now on a school board. What's
the gripe with measuring how good a teacher is by measuring how much the
teacher's students are learning through tests. How much the students learn
is the point of teaching! What are you afraid of? Whether that portion is 25%
or more like 30% it absolutely should be part of how a teacher is rated. If you
want the kids to take more than one test a year, fine, or if you want them to
take them over more than one day a year, ok. Over time, the more kids that take
tests and either do better than expected or worse will tell a story. If there
is a one off poor year, maybe that teacher was stressed or had health issues, no
worry. But it may show that a teacher is very effective that a principal
thought was poor, or it may show that a teacher really isn't that good of a
teacher with five bad years in a row. Over time it will give valueable
cmsense,I have been a teacher for 27 years teacher evaluation has
been happening for at least 27 years that I can speak of. This is not new, nor
is it something that teachers fear. Teachers are fine with evaluating their
performance but simple logic would tell us that to evaluate a teacher based on
their students performance on a single test on a single day is not a very
effective or active way of measuring quality teaching. Evaluate me as much as
you want, but please make it a fair and accurate evaluation of my teaching.
@ HowardAs I said, if there are legitimate gripes the system should
be corrected such as holding students accountable or tossing out any test
results that are the obvious outliers. Good teachers have nothing to fear. The teacher evaluation train has left the station like it or not. They
will join the rest of the professions out there who are already evaluated on the
internet or by their bosses etc.I'm just surprized there
aren't already websites were parents and students rate their local teachers
but I'm sure they are coming.
No cmsense, unless students are actually accountable for their test results
teachers should not be held accountable for these same results. The door must
swing both ways...
Aren't administrators just frustrated or poor former teachers, that had to
get out of the classroom and make some extra money? The real problem,
society wide, is compulsory education and funding schools based on seat time.
When the schools are populated by a few miscreants that don't want to be
there it disrupts and slows down everyone else and sucks resources out of the
entire system. Sell off all the public schools to education companies and let
the market go to work...which might also force some students and many more
teachers to go to work as well.
Students, and teachers have become lab rats to evaluations, comparisons, and
measurements. Overcooked with it.Schools are for teaching and
learning. That's the focus.
"When performance is measured, performance improves. When performance is
measured and reported back, the rate of improvement accelerates." - Thomas
S. MonsonThere will be no perfect evaluation and they won't
always be 100% fair, but there can absolutely be validated measures of teachers
and at least 30% of that evaluation should be test scores. When teachers have
legitimate gripes with the system, changes can be made to the system of
evaluation, but evaluate we must.Kids need to be put first.
Evaluations are needed to weed out the 2-5% of teachers that are burned out or
in the wrong profession and that consistently from year to year underperform
their peers by a large margins. Early career teachers or struggling teachers
should definitly be provided with professional development and a chance to
improve, but if they don't have the skills our kids come first!
Here's the rub, the evaluation instruments to be used shortly will be time
consuming. Parents better not plan on being to meet with their principal soon as
they will be consumed with paperwork. These instruments are a nightmare and
will not discriminate between bad and good teachers but rather what teachers can
jump through the right hoops. This will over burden both teachers and
administrators but ultimately hurt students. Also, many administrators either
weren't that great of teachers and some spent very little time in the
actual classroom. I have to wonder if teachers should be evaluating teachers
with other instruments coming from students and parents for a multi-prong
approach. Also, do we have to evaluate all teachers every year or time better
served evaluating newer and struggling teachers?As far as the test
results. Let's get real. Unless the students can be held accountable for
the results, there is hardly anyway we can hold teachers accountable. Also,
let's face the reality that teaching at Skyline is easier than teaching at
Granger (in regards to test scores) and punishing teachers from more challenging
schools is just plain counterproductive.
Why is their no focus on administrators? Who is evaluating them? From my
experience, there are many bad administrators who are determining who is a good
teacher or not. From my experience, a bad teacher is easier to fire than a bad
administrator. They just tend to get shuffled around the district office that
is nothing more than good 'ol boys club. (There are some girls there too).
The student demographic has to be considered in an objective teacher evaluation
in addition to teacher observation. Test scores without controllling
demographic variables of the students, are not a fair indicator of teacher
competence. The equation needed for fair teacher comparison has to factor in
the student being taught. They are teachers, not miracle workers.
Having a teacher's pay based on test results is like paying your doctor
based on your health whether you've followed their advice or not.
Student accountability to test scores,- teachers to many evaluation forms,-than
controlling of funding, our political leaders have a firmer grip on
education.Parents have little rights to their children as students
are fed, taught, and clothed by our schools.Teachers are
increasingly being micro-managed.Is this the same America of just
fifty years ago?
Make students accountable for their test scores, and you'll magically find
that we have better teachers than we thought we did. For example, on the 7th
grade Language Arts SAGE test (year-end standardized test), a student who scores
zero percent and a student who scores a hundred percent both get promoted to the
8th grade. SAGE test results don't even count on their academic grade for
that class--you can get an "A" in English and a zero on the SAGE. These
test scores mean absolutely nothing, and the students know this. Making teachers
accountable for test scores, but not students, is egregiously unfair to
I spent over 30 years as an educator, in three different states, as well as in
Canada. I found that evaluations were totally dependent on who was doing the
evaluation. The teacher that was liked always got a good evaluation, while the
one that was not liked, regardless of her/his effectiveness as a teacher, would
get a poor evaluation. It was a "principals' pet" situation.
I have been a teacher for almost six years. In this short amount of time, I
have seen lessons change from creative enticing lessons to everyone teach the
same way because it's common core and this is how we are supposed to teach
lessons mentality. The academics and the powers that be figure that this
dangerous precedence will fix the problem. The problems with education today
do not stem from poor teaching....(there are some poor teachers out there I know
that.) The problems stem from the breakdown of society. Until we place emphasis
on "old fashioned" American values of work equals better future, we will
go nowhere. This entitlement generation is creating havoc everywhere including
the school room.
I can be the greatest teacher in the world. Outstanding plans, interesting
discussions, and challenging but caring in my approach. But there will always be
students who either don't care or don't show up. If you disagree with
me on this let me ask one question: if I am wrong then why do we have prisons?
When people know what they should do and still don't do it we use laws to
(supposedly) correct behavior. We don't evaluate that parent who brought
that child into the world and call them a bad parent. We don't evaluate
that child who behaves improperly and call them a bad child. But we do tell that
teacher that if Johnny doesn't hit a certain score on his test that somehow
that teacher is not doing their job as a teacher. Am I missing something here?