Thursday, March 22, 2012
Responses to MAPS Teacher Evaluation Survey as of 03/19/2012
Responses to MAPS Teacher Evaluation Survey as of 03/19/2012
Concerns
I am concerned that important qualities for being a teacher are not addressed: patience, cultural sensitivity, fairness, and dedication.
Also, there should be multiple achievement indicators for student performance such as: academic bowls, essay contests, etc.
Unfair assessment, tied to pay, too much paperwork- less time to teach, not supportive of teachers- punitive
Who is going to be completing the evaluation is a major concern of mine.
Being evaluated unfairly
Using student test scores and opinions about me that affect evaluation scores and salary
Administration accountability Fairness & equity for teachers
Amount of extra work/paperwork placed on teachers to prove they are teaching effectively
The value added aspect and the link to standardized test outcomes
If it is a fair look at how I teach and how my students learn.
Is it fair? So many elements determine a child's academic success, regardless of how I teach them, I would be penalized.
Will it be fair and serious?
Comparing my test scores to others
I'm curious as to how research-based the evaluation system is. I'm also curious whether teacher reflection is part of it.
That it won't be fair and equitable.
I am presently working in the new evaluation program for the second year in Tampa Florida. The teachers are extremely stressed and very unhappy about the process. We won the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation of $100 million dollars for our new evaluation program. The teachers who are the peer evaluators have realized how difficult and stressful it is for the classroom teacher and many peer evaluators have stopped doing it because they do not want to be the one that everyone says oh there she is to catch us. The first year many veteran teachers left because of the stress to be perfect and the second year they are still retiring earlier then they wished. We lost a lot of excellent veteran teachers but wasn't worth the aggravation to them
The criteria involved in Parent and Student evaluation
Questions
Who will be evaluating teachers? principals? an external firm/company?
When will this be tied to pay, what are our alternatives?
What will be teacher responsibilities?
I would like to see what it looks like.
Will pay be affected? When will this occur?
What student evaluations will be used?
How much thought was put into the new system? It seems more like a knee jerk reaction, with change occurring just for the sake of change.
How can we stop it?!?
What are the consequences of not doing well on the new evaluation? Do I get observed again after time to correct what was wrong, or is it a "one shot deal"?
How does it work? How do we guarantee that it is fair and an accurate assessment?
Will I be penalized as a teacher?
I know nothing about it
How do evaluate teaching technology when the whole school attends my classes?
I'm curious as to how research-based the evaluation system is. I'm also curious whether teacher reflection is part of it.
How will those who teach ESOL or ELL students be evaluated considering our students come to the US barely speaking/reading/writing English, and can only do so at 1-2 grade level?
I know that Hillsborough County is being used as a model for Georgia's evaluation system. I am extremely unhappy about this process. Will Georgia's teachers have any input in the process and if so will be penalized in the process?
Student test scores should not be highly valued.
What sector created the criteria for the GTES?
Suggestions
Teachers should also be able to evaluate administration at the school, local, and state level in this new evaluation system.
More teachers to the table!
Provide funding for parapros in the regular classroom
The evaluation to be administered to students, families, administrators and colleagues of the teachers Administrators should also be evaluated.
More teachers involved.
More TIME for teachers to be involved in this evaluation process.
Allow teachers to provide input on how they will be measured.
It is being piloted well before anyone is comfortable with the new system and with little to no lead time.
Read the myriad research articles on the ineffectiveness of the "value added" evaluation system. Read the myriad articles on the ill-advised nature of linking standardized test scores to teacher evaluations or salary increases. Read the myriad studies on the lack of impact on student outcomes that ANY of these proposed methodologies has, then consult some of your own state's education professors and develop a better evaluation system that may actually be representative of teacher/student outcomes.
It seems very complicated and time-consuming; it should be easier to understand and to work with.
INCLUDE TEACHERS
Include real teachers, not hand selected yes men, to the team. Involve GAE and GFT and other unions to the table also.
Please ask COE faculty at colleges to get involved with the process. Working with preservice teachers, we'd be happy to pilot forms, etc.
Use flow charts showing "if, then" conditional statements regarding circumstances/options for evaluations
I feel as a professional, teaching over 35 years that the pressure that is felt to the classroom teacher will not keep new teachers in the profession that’s why many leave the profession within the first 5 years, and will have veteran teachers rethink their stay in the profession for a long time. The staff members must have many teachers developing the evaluation. My suggestions are they should use Charlotte Danielson's rubric not as a gotcha tactic but more as a Positive reinforcement. They must show the teachers positive videos of excellent examples so the teachers will have visual examples. They should have pre- and post-observation questions on video. They should be shown how to answer questions that the evaluators will use to question them about.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Teacher Evaluation Resources
AVAILABLE ON THE GEORGIA DOE WEBSITE
September 13, 2011 Power Point Presentation http://archives.gadoe.org/DMGetDocument.aspx/RT3GreatTeachersLeadersUpdate09-13-11.pdf?p=6CC6799F8C1371F6C8E7A67B7FA01326B20D410569BBB53119753A500E518565&Type=D
Georgia Principles and Framework for Accomplished Teaching
MAPS RESOURCES
Articles and information about teacher evaluation are posted at: http://www.facebook.com/pages/MAPS-Teacher-Evaluation-Information/181689231943870 and http://teacherevaluationitag.blogspot.com/
Join the MAPS Teacher Evaluation Inquiry to Action Group (ItAG)
Race to the Top has pushed Georgia to create a new teacher evaluation system.
In response, MAPS is developing a teacher-led research group to take action based upon our inquiry into this new evaluation system. Join our Teacher Evaluation Inquiry to Action Group (ItAG) by contacting us at: mapsgeorgiaeducation@gmail.com.
To view relevant articles and information, visit http://www.facebook.com/pages/MAPS-Teacher-Evaluation-Information/181689231943870
Anonymously post your stories, information, and/or documents on our blog, http://teacherevaluationitag.blogspot.com/
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
BANKSTREET OCCASIONAL PAPERS
Valuable Resource on Teacher Accountability: http://bankstreet.edu/occasionalpapers/
The Teacher Accountability Debate by Diane Ravitch
In January 2012, the debate about value-added assessment broke through to the general public with the release of a new study by Chetty-Friedman-Rockoff. Although not yet peer reviewed, the study received page one coverage in the The New York Times, where it was presented as clear evidence that “Students with top teachers are less likely to become pregnant as teenagers, more likely to enroll in college, and more likely to earn more money as adults.” The authors of the paper were quick to draw the policy implications of their work. As one of them said, “The message is to fire people sooner rather than later” (Lowrey, 2012). Bloggers were quick to reply, providing spontaneous, if unauthorized, peer review (Ferlazzo, 2012).
The CFR study reinforced the message of the film Waiting for “Superman” and of the corporate-style reformers who have commanded the national media in recent years: Teachers are to blame for the ills of American society. Bad teachers are the ones whose students don’t get higher test scores year after year. If we fire bad teachers, they will be replaced by average or better teachers. If we fire bad teachers, our economy will gain trillions of dollars in productivity. If we fire bad teachers, our schools will rise to the top of international rankings. If we fire bad teachers, all students will be prepared for college or careers. If we fire bad teachers, we can eliminate poverty.
What an alluring set of promises! What utopian dreams, all within our reach! Now editorialists and pundits who have been looking for easy answers have the easiest of answers: Use test scores to identify bad teachers and fire them. Why waste billions on anti-poverty programs, on early childhood education, on health clinics, or anything else? Now we know who the culprits are and we can solve our problems by firing them.
The CFR study supports the claims of Eric Hanushek (quoted in The New York Times story about CFR), who has advocated “deselection” of teachers for several years. Hanushek has argued that by firing the bottom 5-10 percent, our nation would rise to the top of international testing. He assumes that these “bad teachers” would be replaced by average teachers, thus improving test scores.
This narrative has powerful bipartisan support. Not only is it embraced by Republicans, but by the Obama administration. No one has been more outspoken in advocacy for teacher accountability than Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who hailed the mass firing of teachers in Central Falls, Rhode Island (without any evaluations) and who applauded the public release of value-added ratings of thousands of teachers (and their names) by the Los Angeles Times in 2010. The Obama administration’s Race to the Top encouraged dozens of states to pass legislation decreeing that student test scores would count for a significant part of teachers’ evaluations, determining their tenure, promotion, and job security. Buoyed by the efforts of the Obama administration to hold teachers accountable, conservative governors took the narrative to the next level and promoted legislation to eliminate tenure, seniority, and collective bargaining, even to cut teachers’ benefits.
The teacher accountability narrative is part of a larger effort to restructure the teaching profession by turning it into a market-based activity. The teachers whose students get higher scores will get big bonuses as those who falter are fired. Over time, the theory goes, the profession will change as it attracts new people who want to earn big bonuses. Currently, people become teachers out of a sense of idealism and purpose; the goal of the corporate reformers is to change the motivation to the desire to earn a large salary, making teaching more like business.
There are so many assumptions embedded in this narrative that it is hard to know where to begin to deconstruct them.
First
First is the assumption that there is a long line of people eager to replace those teachers who were fired. It seems equally reasonable to assume that test-based accountability will reduce the status of teaching and diminish teacher professionalism. Teachers will be testing technicians, honing their skills by teaching students to pass a test, rather than teaching students to think for themselves and ask questions.
Second
Second is the assumption that these policies will make teaching more attractive to ambitious young people. But as public derision and scorn are directed towards teachers, they become the public scapegoats (like Leon Goldstein in 1984), the ones we can all blame for whatever is wrong. Why would anyone with ambition and brains enter a job with so little social prestige, a very difficult job with few perks, where only a small number can expect to win the big bonuses for higher scores?
Third
Third is the assumption that the tests are scientific instruments that measure what matters most in education. Very few testing experts would agree. They would be quick to point out not only that standardized tests are subject to statistical error, but should be used for the purpose for which they were designed. A test of fifth grade reading measures student performance, not teacher performance. What is more, standardized tests are designed and normed so that there is always a bottom 50 percent.
Fourth
Fourth is the assumption that teachers alone can right the ills of a deeply unequal society. This is simply ludicrous. It is obvious why this narrative appeals to those who are tax-averse, to those who see personal advantage in blaming teachers for our increasingly unequal society.
Fifth
Fifth is the assumption that raising test scores is the same as improving education. By now, everyone should realize that scores can be raised by intensive test preparation, by cheating, by excluding or avoiding low-performing students and by other clever strategies for gaming the system. Once upon a time, educators frowned upon test prep, realizing that it led to short-term gains but sacrificed larger goals, such as critical thinking, creativity, originality, and conceptual understanding. But today, after a decade of No Child Left Behind, the nation spends billions of dollars on testing and test prep activities and considers it a good investment of money and time.
Decisions have consequences, not all of them intended. As its assumptions became embedded in federal and state policies, we can expect to see a narrowing of the curriculum only to what is tested. We can expect to see some districts and states develop tests for every subject, pumping billions more into assessment, since most teachers do not teach subjects that are tested. We can expect to see increased demoralization of teachers, as they lose the last vestiges of professional autonomy.
And we can see politicians using the teacher accountability narrative as their justification for doing little or nothing to reduce poverty or to increase taxes on the wealthiest and on corporations.
These outcomes will not improve the quality of education or the prospects for our society
References
Chetty, R., Friedman, J., & Rockoff, J. (2012). The long term impacts of teachers: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. Retrieved from http://obs.rc.fas.harvard.edu/chetty/value_added.html
Ferlazzo, L. (2012, January 7). The best posts on The New York Times featured teacher effectiveness study. Retrieved from http://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org/2012/01/07/the-best-posts-on-the-ny-times-featured-teacher-effectiveness-study/
Lowrey, A. (2012, January 6). Big study links good teachers to lasting gain. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/education/big-study-links-good-teachers-to-lasting-gain.html?_r=1&hpw
The complete list of problems with high-stakes standardized tests
By Marion Brady veteran teacher, administrator, curriculum designer and author.
In 1949, I was a self-employed trucker, buying and hauling timber for shoring up the roofs of coal mines in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.
A very long United Mine Workers strike put me out of the trucking business. Not having exhausted all the GI Bill benefits due me from a stint in the U.S. Navy, I went back to college, jumped through the necessary certification hoops, and started teaching in 1952 at the high school level.
A few days ago, I went to a reunion of the surviving members of a class that picked up their diplomas 50 years ago, in 1961. They were a smart bunch of kids. The work of a couple of them would be familiar to millions of Americans.
Not surprisingly, a few became teachers. Without exception, those who talked to me at the reunion had no regrets. But also without exception, none of them would now encourage anyone to enter the field. Reason Number One: Standardized, machine-scored, high-stakes tests.
If that comes as a surprise, credit corporate America’s successful promotion of the idea that test scores say something important. Opposition to the present orgy of testing is now wrongly interpreted as unwillingness to be held accountable.
For those who buy that fiction, a list of some of the real reasons for educator opposition may be helpful.
Teachers (at least the ones the public should hope their taxes are supporting) oppose the tests because they focus so narrowly on reading and math that the young are learning to hate reading, math, and school; because they measure only “low level” thinking processes; because they put the wrong people — test manufacturers — in charge of American education; because they allow pass-fail rates to be manipulated by officials for political purposes; because test items simplify and trivialize learning.
Teachers oppose the tests because they provide minimal to no useful feedback; are keyed to a deeply flawed curriculum adopted in 1893; lead to neglect of physical conditioning, music, art, and other, non-verbal ways of learning; unfairly advantage those who can afford test prep; hide problems created by margin-of-error computations in scoring; penalize test-takers who think in non-standard ways.
Teachers oppose the tests because they radically limit their ability to adapt to learner differences; encourage use of threats, bribes, and other extrinsic motivators; wrongly assume that what the young will need to know in the future is already known; emphasize minimum achievement to the neglect of maximum performance; create unreasonable pressures to cheat.
Teachers oppose the tests because they reduce teacher creativity and the appeal of teaching as a profession; are culturally biased; have no “success in life” predictive power; lead to the neglect of the best and worst students as resources are channeled to lift marginal kids above pass-fail “cut lines;” are open to massive scoring errors with life-changing consequences.
Teachers oppose the tests because they’re at odds with deep-seated American values about individual differences and worth; undermine a fundamental democratic principle that those closest to and therefore most knowledgeable about problems are best positioned to deal with them; dump major public money into corporate coffers instead of classrooms.
I, a retired teacher beyond the reach of today’s “reformers,” oppose the tests for those reasons, and for the psychological damage they do to kids not yet able to cope. But my particular, personal beef is that the tests (and the Common Core State Standards on which they’re based) are blocking policymaker consideration of what I believe to be the most promising educational innovation in the last century — the use of general systems theory as it developed during World War II as a tool for reshaping and radically simplifying the “core curriculum.”
If you think that even a couple of those 25 reasons why educators oppose standardized tests are valid, consider getting behind what ought to be an option for every child’s parent or guardian — the right to say, without being pressured or penalized by state or local authority, “Do not subject my child to any test that doesn’t provide useful, same-day or next-day information about performance.”
SHAMEFUL AND DEGRADING EVALUATION OF TEACHERS BY POLITICIANS
FROM http://www.artofteachingscience.org/
SHAMEFUL AND DEGRADING EVALUATION OF TEACHERS BY POLITICIANS
Teacher bashing has become a contact sport that is played out by many U.S. Governors. The rules of the game are staked against teachers by using measures that have not been substantiated scientifically. For many governors, and mayors it is fair play to release the names of every teacher in the city, and their Value-added score determined by analyzing student achievement test scores. None of the data that has been published has been scientifically validated, and in fact, the data that is provided is uneven, and unreliable from one year to the next.
Steven Sellers Lapham, in a letter to the editor, wrote this on teacher evaluations:
With this in mind, I am going to put into perspective the reform initiative that many governors, mayors, politicians, and for-profit groups and foundation are pushing on us. First, I’ll identify the three parts or legs of the reform, accountability, deregulation of schooling, the erosion of teacher education.
Then I’ll report a few stories from several states that will give you a feel for the extent of how teachers are coming under fire, and being held hostage by unscientific methods of evaluation.
Three Legs of Reform
Leg 1. The first leg of reform is steeped in accountability, of not only teachers and administrators, but the students themselves. Accountability testing is now in place throughout public education in the form of high-stakes achievement tests.
The fundamental reason for the increased attacks on teachers is that education reformers believe that student achievement gains can be traced to the quality of the teacher, and that what the teacher contributes to student gains (or loses) can be measured.
The reformers believe that parents and other citizens should be privy to this data, and indeed in several cities, newspapers have published data bases revealing teacher VAM scores by name.
The reformers believe that all students can increase their achievement scores if they have the right teachers, regardless of where they live. This is one of the three-legs that reformers believe will turn the education of American students around.
Leg 2. The second leg is the deregulation of public education through the creation of charters, and the use of vouchers. As I have written, charter schools do not produce the achievement test gains that supporters claim, and the charter school movement has increased the segregation of black and Hispanic students, such that most of these students attend schools with nearly 100% either black or Hispanic students.
Leg 3. The third leg is the breakdown and deregulation of teacher education by claiming that alternative pathways into the profession is the way to go. Research shows that inexperienced, and especially un-certified teachers can not provide the quality education that more experienced, and well schooled teacher deliver.
Note: The rationale for the 3 legs is based on Failure of U.S. Public Secondary Schools in Mathematics, Michael Marder, Associate Dean for Science and Mathematics Education and Professor Physics at the University of Texas.State by State Reports
Much of the information that follows I mined from EducationNews.org. I recommend the site as a source of current news about education.
New York. For example, New York City Major Bloomberg has said that he would oppose any attempt to restrict parents’ right to know teacher evaluation scores. Critics of the public display of evaluation scores point out that the data published is not valid, and parents would draw the wrong conclusions about their children’s teachers.
Ohio. The Ohio governor wants teachers in the bottom 10% of schools to re-take the state licensing exam. According to the Governor, this will hold these teachers more accountable by giving schools the ability to fire teachers based on test results. Sounds like double jeapody.
Connecticut. The governor of Connecticut believes his educational reform agenda should link evaluation and teacher salaries to standardized tests. This is his way of rewarding quality teaching, and increase the overall quality of students’ education. Again, here is a governor willing to ignore research on the use of standardized achievement as a way to assess teacher effectiveness.
Georgia. Georgia was one of the Race to the Top winners, and also has been approved for NCLB Waivers (ESEA Flexibility Request). In their proposal to the RTTT, they lay out how the 3-legged approach to education reform will be implemented. Testing, alternative pathways to teaching, teacher evaluation are on display in the RTTT proposal, and the Georgia NCLB Waivers. Sticking to the “raising the bar” on achievement, Georgia has informed teachers that they will “grow” student achievement by 9 points in third and fifth grade and 11 points in eighth grade science.
Along with raising achievement, the state will close the gap between white and black students. Great teachers and leaders is another initiative, and here the state is developing evaluation tools to measure teacher progress. When you read the report, several hundred pages long, you wonder if these administrators have any sense of what a teacher’s work day looks like.
In the details of the NCLB Waivers teachers and administrators will be subjected to intense evaluation based unsubstantiated measures. With the Waivers, all school districts will be responsible to implementing the conditions of three principles. One of these is the development and adoption of guidelines for local teacher and principal evaluation. Another is the adoption of college-and career-ready standards.
The proposals are full of all of shibboleths of current reform such as high quality standards, common standards, data systems, teacher evaluation and student test scores. When you read this proposal, you wonder if any of these people have a clue about effective learning and teaching.
North Carolina. In a Race to the Top pilot program, $600,000 is being spent to enable students to rate teachers. Based on work at Harvard, 30-question and 90-question survey will be used for K-12 students. Although no decision has been made whether student evaluations will be part of overall teacher evaluation, don’t hold your breath.
New York. Governor Cuomo, after getting the state to agree to VAM based teacher evaluation system, now is pushing an online initiative that involve parents and advocates “to make sure it (teacher evaluation) gets implemented in our schools.” The initiative NY Students First is another website that puts the blame on education failures on shoulders of teachers. Using heavy handed tactics, schools only have one year to get geared up to implement the teacher evaluation system, or else—-risk forfeiting increases in education aid.
Colorado. The Governor of Colorado (John Hickenlooper) signed a bill into law that changes the way teachers and principles are evaluated. The law requires that 50% of teacher evaluation be based on student achievement tests. Like New York, Colorado has a website, Educator Effectiveness: A Colorado Priority, devoted to teacher evaluation.
According to the Senate Bill 10-191, all licensed personal will be evaluated annually, with 50% of the evaluation being based on student growth.
Do you have any stories to add about teacher evaluation in your state? What is the current status of teacher evaluation?
SHAMEFUL AND DEGRADING EVALUATION OF TEACHERS BY POLITICIANS
Teacher bashing has become a contact sport that is played out by many U.S. Governors. The rules of the game are staked against teachers by using measures that have not been substantiated scientifically. For many governors, and mayors it is fair play to release the names of every teacher in the city, and their Value-added score determined by analyzing student achievement test scores. None of the data that has been published has been scientifically validated, and in fact, the data that is provided is uneven, and unreliable from one year to the next.
Steven Sellers Lapham, in a letter to the editor, wrote this on teacher evaluations:
…evaluating teachers on the basis on student test score data has been exposed as a fraud. The final nail in the coffin appeared in the March 2012 issue of the education journal Kappan. In the article “Evaluating Teacher Evaluation,” Sanford professor of education Linda Darling-Hammond and her colleagues echo the 2009 findings of the National Research Council.Darling-Hammond writes in her research article:
However, current research suggests that VAM ratings are not sufficiently reliable or valid to support high-stakes, individual-level decisions about teachers.Mr. Lapham adds that student test scores should not be used as a basis for evaluating teachers. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation just released a report on the best ways to evaluate teachers. It does not even mention such an absurd idea , much less recommend it.
With this in mind, I am going to put into perspective the reform initiative that many governors, mayors, politicians, and for-profit groups and foundation are pushing on us. First, I’ll identify the three parts or legs of the reform, accountability, deregulation of schooling, the erosion of teacher education.
Then I’ll report a few stories from several states that will give you a feel for the extent of how teachers are coming under fire, and being held hostage by unscientific methods of evaluation.
Three Legs of Reform
Leg 1. The first leg of reform is steeped in accountability, of not only teachers and administrators, but the students themselves. Accountability testing is now in place throughout public education in the form of high-stakes achievement tests.
The fundamental reason for the increased attacks on teachers is that education reformers believe that student achievement gains can be traced to the quality of the teacher, and that what the teacher contributes to student gains (or loses) can be measured.
The reformers believe that parents and other citizens should be privy to this data, and indeed in several cities, newspapers have published data bases revealing teacher VAM scores by name.
The reformers believe that all students can increase their achievement scores if they have the right teachers, regardless of where they live. This is one of the three-legs that reformers believe will turn the education of American students around.
Leg 2. The second leg is the deregulation of public education through the creation of charters, and the use of vouchers. As I have written, charter schools do not produce the achievement test gains that supporters claim, and the charter school movement has increased the segregation of black and Hispanic students, such that most of these students attend schools with nearly 100% either black or Hispanic students.
Leg 3. The third leg is the breakdown and deregulation of teacher education by claiming that alternative pathways into the profession is the way to go. Research shows that inexperienced, and especially un-certified teachers can not provide the quality education that more experienced, and well schooled teacher deliver.
Note: The rationale for the 3 legs is based on Failure of U.S. Public Secondary Schools in Mathematics, Michael Marder, Associate Dean for Science and Mathematics Education and Professor Physics at the University of Texas.State by State Reports
Much of the information that follows I mined from EducationNews.org. I recommend the site as a source of current news about education.
New York. For example, New York City Major Bloomberg has said that he would oppose any attempt to restrict parents’ right to know teacher evaluation scores. Critics of the public display of evaluation scores point out that the data published is not valid, and parents would draw the wrong conclusions about their children’s teachers.
Ohio. The Ohio governor wants teachers in the bottom 10% of schools to re-take the state licensing exam. According to the Governor, this will hold these teachers more accountable by giving schools the ability to fire teachers based on test results. Sounds like double jeapody.
Connecticut. The governor of Connecticut believes his educational reform agenda should link evaluation and teacher salaries to standardized tests. This is his way of rewarding quality teaching, and increase the overall quality of students’ education. Again, here is a governor willing to ignore research on the use of standardized achievement as a way to assess teacher effectiveness.
Georgia. Georgia was one of the Race to the Top winners, and also has been approved for NCLB Waivers (ESEA Flexibility Request). In their proposal to the RTTT, they lay out how the 3-legged approach to education reform will be implemented. Testing, alternative pathways to teaching, teacher evaluation are on display in the RTTT proposal, and the Georgia NCLB Waivers. Sticking to the “raising the bar” on achievement, Georgia has informed teachers that they will “grow” student achievement by 9 points in third and fifth grade and 11 points in eighth grade science.
Along with raising achievement, the state will close the gap between white and black students. Great teachers and leaders is another initiative, and here the state is developing evaluation tools to measure teacher progress. When you read the report, several hundred pages long, you wonder if these administrators have any sense of what a teacher’s work day looks like.
In the details of the NCLB Waivers teachers and administrators will be subjected to intense evaluation based unsubstantiated measures. With the Waivers, all school districts will be responsible to implementing the conditions of three principles. One of these is the development and adoption of guidelines for local teacher and principal evaluation. Another is the adoption of college-and career-ready standards.
The proposals are full of all of shibboleths of current reform such as high quality standards, common standards, data systems, teacher evaluation and student test scores. When you read this proposal, you wonder if any of these people have a clue about effective learning and teaching.
North Carolina. In a Race to the Top pilot program, $600,000 is being spent to enable students to rate teachers. Based on work at Harvard, 30-question and 90-question survey will be used for K-12 students. Although no decision has been made whether student evaluations will be part of overall teacher evaluation, don’t hold your breath.
New York. Governor Cuomo, after getting the state to agree to VAM based teacher evaluation system, now is pushing an online initiative that involve parents and advocates “to make sure it (teacher evaluation) gets implemented in our schools.” The initiative NY Students First is another website that puts the blame on education failures on shoulders of teachers. Using heavy handed tactics, schools only have one year to get geared up to implement the teacher evaluation system, or else—-risk forfeiting increases in education aid.
Colorado. The Governor of Colorado (John Hickenlooper) signed a bill into law that changes the way teachers and principles are evaluated. The law requires that 50% of teacher evaluation be based on student achievement tests. Like New York, Colorado has a website, Educator Effectiveness: A Colorado Priority, devoted to teacher evaluation.
According to the Senate Bill 10-191, all licensed personal will be evaluated annually, with 50% of the evaluation being based on student growth.
Timeline for Conducting Annual Evaluation, extracted from Colorado DOE site, March 19, 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)