Evaluation & Assessment

I have been teaching long enough now that I have the pleasure of watching some of my former students become my colleagues. One of them is Maxwell, a young man now in his early thirties whom  I have known since he was a ninth grader.  Thoughtful, respectful, and intelligent, Maxwell has always leaned toward public service.  He was raised in a foster home by a loving, elderly couple, and after their deaths, helped to raise his two younger sisters. After graduating from college with honors, he served two tours in Iraq; then the married father of two boys decided he wanted to be a teacher and a role model to other Black young men.

Max has taught history at several high schools, and is highly respected by co-workers and students. For those who care about numbers, every year that he has taught, 95% of Max’s students have succeeded on the state’s history exit exam (with the exception of one year when the average slipped to 87%).  Like so many of us, Max spends large amounts of his personal time and money on his students.  He prepares lessons weeks in advance, constantly reflects and monitors his own work, pursues his own professional development, and volunteers for extra duties at the school, all without additional compensation.

You would think he’d be a poster for the future of teaching: a successful, minority male teacher who cares about his students and whose students perform well academically. You’d think his school administrators would be thrilled to have him on their staff and support his efforts.

Think again.

Max, who is also a deacon in our church, sat with me after service recently and explained why he has decided to look for other career options.  I had followed the saga over the last year and a half since his school changed principals (again) and had been put under state receivership because of administrative/financial mismanagement issues and low student performance (obviously, not Max’s students).  The new principal, a transfer from an elementary school in another district, is according to the teachers, “weak” in dealing with high school students or administrative issues.  The tipping point for Max, however, has been the state-appointed consultant who has been given carte blanche to evaluate and dictate teaching practice to all faculty--including those who don’t need such micromanaging.  

“It’s like everything I do or want to do now is unacceptable,” he told me, almost in tears. “I just can’t take it anymore.” He has been threatened by his new principal with firing on the grounds of insubordination (we are a right -to-work state), unless he stops disagreeing with the consultant and simply “does what he is told.” Being fired on those grounds would also put his teaching license in jeopardy.

This particular situation carries heavy racial overtones: the consultant is a white woman, with limited teaching experience herself, and none teaching African American students. What she does have is a lot of educational theory, a laundry list of generic best practices, and authority from the district leadership to tell every teacher what and how to teach, even in subjects for which she has no pedagogical background.  If this were just one consultant in one school causing problems for one highly effective teacher, the situation could be salvageable, and so might Maxwell’s career.  Unfortunately, similar scenes are being played out in predominantly Black and poor schools all across the Delta, and the nation.    

Maxwell, like many of my young Black students, wants to remain here in the Delta, where he is needed.  The Mississippi Delta has been an area of chronic teacher shortage for over 25 years, and growing our own teachers is clearly the best long-term solution to that problem.  Yet, it is some of our best, Black teachers who have been targeted by would-be reformers as problems that need to be whipped into line or pushed out of our schools.  Another of my students has become principal of what was a struggling school, whose students face many economic and social obstacles. The elementary school has met or exceeded its learning goals each year of her principalship, yet the district instead of rewarding and supporting her work, has cut the school’s funding more than other lower performing ones in the district. The district also, without input from parents, re-shuffled student school assignments so that the school’s highest performing students were moved to other schools.

The stress of wanting to continue doing what Max believes is his professional best for his students but being prevented, even forbidden, from doing so has taken its toll on this diligent young teacher.  He told me he’s looking at a job with a textbook company or maybe taking an offer from a company looking for someone to do workforce training (both of which pay more than his classroom teaching job). Meanwhile, our schools continue to churn through temporary instructors from various alternative programs or long-term substitutes causing untold disruption and damage to the hopes and dreams of our children.

My heart breaks for Maxwell and the many other wonderful Black teachers like him who are being forced to make such unnecessary and harmful choices.  My heart breaks for the students whose education is being compromised and short-changed by administrative decisions that put self-promotion and preservation ahead of real student needs and potential.  But sadness and disgust, alone,  won’t change anything. We can’t say we want high quality teachers in every classroom, if we’re not going to allow them to do high quality teaching. Otherwise, a free, quality public education for every American child remains only a partially filled dream and an empty promise. I’m more determined than ever to continue fighting for teacher voice and teacher leadership in public education, and more important, encouraging the next generation of teachers to take up that fight. 

I'm devoting a series of blogs to exploring some of the NBPTS standards, and challenging the myth that what constitutes good teaching is mystery.

Would treating underachieving students of color the way we do gifted and talented ones be a better and faster way to close the achievement gap?

I agree with recent statements by Sen. Lamar Alexander that Congress should be cautious about legislating too specifically to states how teacher evaluation programs should be designed. But here's a thought: Maybe the best way to figure out how to...

If you want a clear, insightful explanation of where we should really be focusing our efforts to improve American education, try the great piece by Dr. David K. Cohen, guest blogger at Shanker Blog

Here's the response to my last blog post from my collegue, Susan "Ernie" Rambo. She has been a guest blogger here before.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hi Renee,

I've read the report on teacher evaluation several times now and find myself comparing it to what my school district might have in store for us in the near future. Both the governor of our state and our school district's new superintendent are recommending that we adopt similar measures to evaluate our teachers. What I like most about the report, is that it includes teachers in the decision-making process of creating and implementing the four distinct areas of teacher evaluations. Bill Ferriter stated it quite well in his blog when he mentioned that the work of the Denver New Millennium Initiative (DNMI) extended the work of policy-makers so that teacher evaluation reform can become a reality instead of a "half-baked plan!"

Rather than dismiss any weaknesses within the Colorado policy, the DNMI made recommended several reality-based ways to strengthen the policy.

    The group focused on four areas within their state's new policy:

  1. Developing meaningful measures of student growth (including in non-tested areas) to comprise 50 percent of a teacher's evaluation.
  2. Defining qualifications and training for evaluators.
  3. Determining how to account for school conditions and student factors in a teacher's evaluation.
  4. Designing an evaluation system that informs both employment decisions and professional growth and learning.

You mentioned how the recommendations for the qualifications and training of peer evaluators reminded you of the training for scoring National Board of Professional Teaching Standards portfolios. I was also reminded of that process as I read the suggestion that teachers create individual growth goals related to their schools' growth plans, and develop the tools to measure their progress toward meeting those goals. Such work requires teachers to reflect on the needs of their students and why they choose specific strategies to support those needs, much like the work required in attaining National Board Certification.

I am especially interested in the DNMI's recommendations for using teachers in hybrid roles – part time teaching and part time evaluating their peers – to improve the evaluation process of teachers. A national professional development organization, Learning Forward, recommends that every teacher, as well as every student, learns every day. A well-designed peer-evaluation system would generate an atmosphere where all educators could improve their practice through the proven application of reflection and action. The DNMI suggests using teachers in hybrid roles to first be trained, then master, and then train others to apply an evaluation process. Being evaluated by a peer, experiencing the same challenges as I do in the classroom, would maintain much more credibility than the brief visits of an over-burdened administrator who might or might not have time to visit the classroom during the year.

I commend the DNMI for putting forth the suggestion that teachers' evaluations should include a professional development component. The recommendation of using a professional guild to design personal professional development activities for teachers based on their evaluations would be a welcome improvement to the traditional "one-size-fits-all" and "sit and get" professional development provided at many schools. I would also like to see a component that includes each teacher using student achievement data and peer evaluation results to plan a personal professional development plan that utilizes the offerings of both the professional guild and external resources.

In my work with other teachers at the Center for Teaching Quality in studying Teacher Working Conditions, we recommended that teachers should be provided with High Quality Professional Development that focuses on meeting the unique needs of their students.The DNMI report extends this concept when they describe using teacher-evaluation rubrics that are created by the state but also include locally-based options for criteria that are based on local goals and concerns. Additionally, the component that encourages teachers to conduct action research toward goal attainment, as you mentioned in your letter, is a most powerful tool that allows teachers to substantiate the choices they make in their classrooms that impact student learning. What works in one classroom might work in another, but each teacher needs time and support to reflect upon and evaluate chosen strategies to determine their effectiveness.

Despite the concerns with using test scores to evaluate teachers, the Denver group has published realistic suggestions for how our schools can move toward continuous learning and higher achievement of our students.I look forward to more news from this group and from you, as we experience the changes in store for us.

Regards,

Ernie

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anybody else think the teachers are pointing us in the right directon on developing effective teacher evaluation systems? What do we need to do to get these ideas into policy?

[Sharing a letter I wrote to my TLN friend and recent guest blogger, Susan (Ernie) Rambo].

Hey Ernie,

I'm fairly impressed with the work of the work of our colleagues in the Denver New Millennium Initiative on their new report on teacher evaluation. The report couldn't have come at a better time for me, as I'm involved with work on teacher evaluation right now on several levels both within my state and nationally. This is one of the most articulate and most provocative set of teacher views on this topic that I've seen so far. Clearly, the group is working with an eye to the political realities of their own state, but also with their hearts towards what's best for students, and their thinking grounded in the wisdom of practice informed by carefully analyzed research.

For example, the four issues (p.6) they identify as critical to developing an effective teacher evaluation system, to me highlight the practical wisdom teachers bring to this discussion, especially, item #2: Qualifications and training of the evaluators. Their treatment of this point later in the report reminds me of how evaluators are trained for the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards scoring process, and I suspect they drew heavily from that model.

As teachers, the group also recognizes the dual role of an effective evaluation system (p. 10), and this is a point that needs more stress in the current education reform discussion. Schools and districts cannot use a "fire-and-replace" approach to reach the goal of consistently high quality teachers for all children. Helping teachers to identify strengths and weaknesses and providing ongoing support to address those weaknesses and share those strengths should be the primary focus of our teacher evaluation systems. Doing so would not only lessen the possibility of incompetent teachers remaining in the profession, but significantly reduce the amount of mediocre, overly scripted, or trial-and-error teaching occurring in schools across the country.

Also, as a member of the Teaching 2030 TeacherSolutions team, I especially appreciate the Denver group's suggestion about the role of "professional guilds" in the teacher evaluation process. One of the reasons I pursued National Board certification myself was to get serious feedback from highly accomplished peers on my work, and their suggestions for how I could improve my work. I love Vinnie Basile's projection (p.10) of how such a guild might work. This is one of the key roles I envision for teachers' unions as they reconfigure themselves to serve our profession in the new century.

I wonder how many policymakers or others will understand just how powerful The Goal Attainment Process described on pg. 8 is for actually reaching the goal of putting a quality teacher in every classroom? The suggested evaluation process would require teachers to demonstrate a critical professional pedagogical skill: the ability to develop, analyze, and use assessments at the classroom level. In this step, teachers would have to demonstrate how they connect what's going on in individual classrooms to the larger school and district goals. Also, the suggestion for a statewide assessment database (p.8) of teacher made assessments and how to handle the use of that database, particularly in the non-standardize tested areas, is brilliant and squares with practices from our most advanced competing nations in the area of education.

Of course, the most contentious issue around teacher evaluation is the use (or not) of student standardized test data to determine teacher performance. I've noticed how many teachers not only don't oppose, but expect the use of student test data as part of their professional evaluations. This contradicts many of the media-touted education reformers who claim teachers are afraid of these tests for our own selfish reasons. However, like most teachers, the Denver NMI also point out the very real dangers and limitations of excessive testing and over-reliance on test data, even as they (and I) look forward to "more robust student assessments" (5). The group seems to take the position that neither the tests nor the data is the problem, but rather how both are being misused.

The group's response to current attempts at using value-added measures in determining teacher performance, also, shows how thoughtful and fearless these teachers are. Despite the clearly documented flaws in these measures, the group doesn't advocate throwing out test data completely, but rather calls for more appropriate and effective ways to use it, and they emphasize that can only be done in partnership with teachers. It's a professional and principled stance; after all, standardized tests have been around a long time and some educators have found them more useful than others. Unfortunately, such student-centered logic may be hard to hear over the racket of racing to reform and the cheering of a billion-dollar testing industry.

Just as I finished writing this, I noticed fellow TLN blogger Bill Ferriter had posted his take on the report, so I hope this signals the start of much more discussion both within TLN and around the nation on the ideas Denver NMI has put forward. As many states and districts rush to "do something" about teacher evaluation, it's truly important that professional teachers step up and bring much needed light to this heated debate. Can't wait to hear what you see in the report, and where you think it might take us.

Best,

Add these to the summer required reading list for members of Congress, U.S. Dept. of Education staff, and other policymakers attempting to make critical decisions about education quality and reform in America (care of my friends at Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching):

1. Report from the National Center on Education and the Economy showing that the direction of popular U.S. trends in education reform are headed in the wrong direction and may further reduce the performance of American students against that of their peers in competing nations.

2. Nearly a decade of America's test-based accountability systems, from "adequate yearly progress" to high school exit exams, has shown little to no positive effect overall on learning and insufficient safeguards against gaming the system, a blue-ribbon committee of the National Academies of Science concludes in a new report.

Yes, this material will be on the test.

As a community college teacher, I and my colleagues have seen many students who have technically completed their high school requirements, yet they lack both the academic skills and the maturity to handle college level work. This includes students from public and private schools (contrary to the persistent myth that all private schools are great, and all public schools are horrible). We've seen high school valedictorians crash and burn in their Freshman level core courses; meanwhile, other students whose transcripts and placement scores say they are not ready, make astounding progress and graduate.

Those of us who value and understand student learning have long argued that student progress along the educational continuum should be determined by demonstrated knowledge, not age, seat time, or test scores. Although most systems still try to convey students through school on a linear assembly line, each student experiences the teaching/learning processes differently. These individual differences are generally not picked up by traditional standardized tests which are not designed for that level of specificity, particularly if those test results are not properly analyzed in a timely way by classroom teachers familiar with the student.

Colleges usually determine readiness with placement tests that are often not aligned with the curriculum actually taught in PK-12 schools, and certainly not with many state high school exit exams. For example, the skills most needed for success in a class such as Freshman English Composition, are those most likely to have been reduced or eliminated at the high school level in favor of more generic ones that show up on state tests. My own college's study of incoming freshmen over a five year period found that the deeper our feeder schools moved into the state testing program in English, the poorer students' writing ability and grammar usage had become. The question is not when should students be allowed to leave high school; it's what should they know and be able to do when we declare them ready to move on to the next phase of their lives.

Everything in education for the past century has been time-based in an effort to apply a factory-efficiency model to the academic preparation of children. As my colleague and co-author, Shannon C'de Baca noted in our book, Teaching 2030: What We Must Do for Our Students and Our Public Schools Now and in the Future:

Our knowledge of how people learn continues to expand exponentially. We have significant data and instruments that can help us determine individual learning preferences. And yet we adhere to a system of assembly-line education delivery that requires all students to resent their thinking every 50 minutes, all the while expecting them to master increasingly complex content that does not chunk easily into small boxes of time. It just doesn't work. (p. 93).

I currently teach dual enrollment high school students [high school students taking college courses], most of whom are the top students within their local schools. Sadly, many of the skills and habits that have brought them success at the secondary level, lead to frustration and even failure in their college courses. Yet, they have done everything they've been asked to do.

One step towards correcting this misalignment is to treat education, particularly what we now consider secondary (middle school/high school) and college levels as a continuum both pedagogically and fiscally. Rather than diverting funds, as Gov. Daniels suggests, merge the resources, the curriculum, and the instruction to produce a more coherent, individualized, and rigorous educational system for all children.

Originally posted May 9, 2011 at NationalJournal.com, Expert Blogs: Education

I'm thrilled to share with you this thoughtful post from my TLN colleague Ernie Rambo, who picks up on a frequently addressed theme around TLN of hybrid roles for teachers, especially teacher leaders, and how educators could be held accountable for their work in such roles. Please share your questions and responses.

Our school district looks really good on paper. School-improvement plans list interventions such as "school-wide collaboration" and "differentiated learning." In our district, teachers receive professional development from Project Facilitators on "Response to Intervention" (recently amended to "Response to Instruction"). Training for "Depth of Knowledge" complements the application of Bloom's Taxonomy in our lesson plans. They appear to be ahead of the game when it comes to providing professional development for the fifth largest school district in the nation.

Every school has teachers who are capable to lead, but don't want to leave their practice behind.

In truth, our school district is only ahead of the game at first glance. The district's Project Facilitators are prior classroom teachers beginning to move up in the ranks of school district personnel. The district requires them to teach specific strategies for implementation in the classroom. Unfortunately, the project facilitators are no longer in the classroom. Many classroom teachers are just as qualified as Project Facilitators to share recent research and school district policies with their colleagues.

Every school has teachers who might not realize that they can lead without having to leave their students behind.

What if? What if each school had the opportunity to release one or two teachers part time each year to be the education research experts at their school? Based on the needs of students identified by teacher analysis of student data, a teacher could spend half of his or her contracted day researching strategies that apply to those needs. After researching, the education research expert could lead discussions with the rest of the faculty, to seek out the best solutions for their students. The education research teacher might support the action research projects at their school, helping to organize data and finding relevant literature that applies to the action research.

The example described above could be termed as a hybrid teacher – one who spends part of the day in a traditional teaching assignment while performing as a teacher leader during the rest of the day. In a recent publication by Alesha Daughtrey at the Center for Teaching Quality and their Teacher Solutions Teacher Working Conditions Team (of which I am a contributing member), hybrid teaching is discussed as one way in which teachers lead, and share in the accountability of a school's performance. We suggest that putting a priority on encouraging teacher leadership can lead to improving student learning. Teacher leaders are immersed in the unique culture of the school and can improve their practice and student achievement simultaneously at their schools.

My Center for Teaching Quality blogging colleague, Kristoffer Kohl, describes his experience as a hybrid teacher, using his expertise with data analysis as his school's data strategist, in this Teacher Magazine article. When his colleagues noted how Kris used student data to steer instruction in his own classroom, they suggested that Kris might be able to analyze all of the school's data – a task that most teachers do not have the time to do as often and with the level of scrutiny that it needs. Kris took on the role of analyzing data for half the school day while teaching writing skills and providing skills interventions during the other half of the day. Kris and his colleagues showed accountability for their students' academic success by recognizing Kris' specialized skills and suggesting that he teach in a non-traditional way.

Creating hybrid teaching opportunities at a school cannot be done in factory fashion. Each position is dependent upon the student's needs as well as each teacher's expertise. Current school schedules do not always lend themselves to teachers with half the student load of other teachers – another example of why cookie-cutter or assembly line designs for teaching assignments do not work with the needs of today's schools. Yet if we see more opportunities for teachers to lead within their schools, such as in the TAP schools, located across the county, or as in other nations, as Professor Darling-Hammond describes in this Washington Post article, the accountability for student achievement might be reasonable instead of an overwhelming burden. We would not just look good on paper, we'd be accountably good.

==============================================================

Susan “Ernie” Rambo is a 23-year classroom veteran who currently teaches at Walter Johnson Junior High in the Clark County School District of Las Vegas, Nev. A National Board certified teacher, Rambo is a member of the Teacher Leaders Network and co-author of the 2010 report from the Center for Teaching Quality, “Transforming School Conditions: Building Bridges to the Education System That Students and Teachers Deserve."

Syndicate content