re: Teacher observations have been a waste of time and money

The US is the wealthiest country on the planet, and Mark Dynarski wants to implicate teachers for low test scores.

Mark Dynarski gets it wrong with teacher evaluation (Brookings, Dec. 8, 2016).

1. Mark Dynarski does not understand assessment: "The crucial question is whether students are learning. To answer that, we need some measure of learning: a test."
   
   Tests do not measure student learning. Tests measure a student's ability, or choice, to achieve high test scores.
   
   Alternatively, students benefit from assessments that are designed to help them show what they have learned, from their own perspective. Crafty educators can use data, both qualitative and quantitative, from student-driven assessments to adjust instructional strategies to meet students' needs.
   
   
2. The author does not understand science: "Teacher evaluation systems need a stronger scientific basis."
   
   Quantitative data from high stakes standardized tests does not constitute "science." Science would consider a systemic, holistic approach, and then isolate variables. And there are at least as many variables in a classroom as there are students.
   
   Individual students are too varied to prove (or disprove) a teacher's effectiveness. Trends or patterns within one classroom with 25 students -- or across several classrooms with 150 students -- in the same year, or over several years, SHOULD vary based on students' interests and needs, and the extent to which a teacher is supported by her/his school.
   
   There are also too many variables before, during, and after school to link teacher effectiveness with "objective" test scores.
   
   
3.  Perhaps the author does not understand inequity: "We need a more solid research and measurement foundation about what aspects of teaching improve learning."
   
   When children arrive at school well-rested, well-fed, and feeling safe and curious, well-supported teachers can do wonders. Teachers are life-long learners, and we can always enrich our curricular, instructional, and assessment strategies. Fair-enough.
   
   However, students who are proximate to the violence of poverty exhibit enormous amounts of stress that they bring to schools. These students need equity, i.e. unique in-school services that can help them want to do well in school. And it would be really helpful if our society acted to address the upstream source of poverty, i.e. income inequality.
   Data from The Spirit Level shows that even wealthy American children also suffer from the fallout of an unhealthy society.
   
   Among the wealthiest 23 countries on the planet, those with the biggest income inequality (i.e. the U.S.) have the highest rates of depression, mental illness, teen pregnancy, incarceration rates, drug abuse, obesity, and violence, and low educational "achievement" rates (see Fig. 1 below).
   
   Fig. 1: Educational scores are higher in more equal rich countries. - The Spirit Level
   
   
4. The author does not understand pedagogy: "We are spending billions to little effect because we do not know enough about what we are looking for."
   
   I know what I am looking for; I'm sure it varies among colleagues -- and I'm OK with that. I think that effective teachers:
   a. cultivate a love of life-long learning
   b. promote critical and creative literacy
   c. foster democratic civic engagement
   
   If these outcomes come close to what we are looking for within the profession, then we should ask teachers to design their own professional learning plans so that they become more effective at realizing such aims.
   If students come to school and aren't ready to learn, then we need to support students and educators by creating and sustaining equitable in-school conditions.
   Focusing on education as a means to redress poverty will help to a point: but it will not address the source of inequities, i.e. income inequality. Therefore, we need to support students and educators by creating and sustaining equitable out-of-school conditions.
   
5. The author has a point: "We need a more solid research and measurement foundation about what aspects of teaching improve learning."
   
   We need hybrid teaching roles so that more teachers can conduct meaningful research and advocate for effective systemic strategies that promote student engagement.

 

 

How much is a teacher worth?

Today I read the front page of the Philadelphia Inquirer and learned that the outgoing CEO of Sunoco is receiving about $37 million in compensation for liquidating assets (i.e. shedding at least 175 jobs). 

Of course we want a robust economy, and I'm sure the SUNOCO CEO has a skill set that is valued by many. But I wonder if her skill set is any more complex than those of teachers who make hundreds of decisions on a daily basis.  These decisions affect the health, engagement and lives of 180,000 children across Philadelphia, and millions more across the US. 

Teachers are valuable.

At the same time, public education has been framed as THE leverage point to enrich our economy.  It has been said that we need college- and career-ready students who can help the US retain its economic prowess.  Yet I thought the purpose of education was to advance democratic equity.

A robust democracy is not at odds with a sustainable economy.

We need teacher leadership to ensure that smart policy influences curriculum, instruction and assessment.  We need effective working conditions so that teachers can flourish.  We need teachers to be seen (and see themselves) as professionals.  We need time to study and inform policy.

I know that all of us won't always agree on policy -- and that is a good thing.  But I'd like to believe that we see teachers as professionals who have the experience that is essential to dynamic education systems.  And if we take care of our teachers, we take care of our students and schools -- and our society.

How much are teacher worth?

Effective Teacher Evaluation: Stuck in the Middle

According to an article in EdWeek, New groups giving teachers alternative voice, "...52% of teachers now have 10 or fewer years in the profession...."  Many of these new teachers are interested in new models of compensation, teacher leadership and career choices.  Not all teachers, regardless of their experience, agree on what it means to be an effective teacher.

Some of the newer teachers are finding their voices in new teacher advocacy groups, some of which are aligned within unions (see NEWTLA in Los Angeles) or outside of the local (see Educators 4 Excellence in NYC). Some of these groups receive funding from the Gates Foundation, while others do not.  It is arguable that E4E could be characterized as neo-liberal in its call for 1) teacher evaluation to be based on student growth and 2) the elimination of seniority.  Other groups, such as Teachers Union Reform Network, seek to integrate labor, professional and social justice models of unionism.  And as a member of Teacher Leaders Network, I've seen my own positions on educational policy be characterized as either too conservative or too liberal.

Some of our own colleagues may agree with some or all of these new teacher groups' platforms.

There is no clear political designation for these emergent groups, yet I would argue that our unions could be more communicative, both horizontally among members, and vertically between members and the union officers. For example, with Philadelphia's upcoming negotiations about the teacher contract (which expires in 2012), effective communication is a concern.  Where and when do teachers get to influence the direction of contract negotiations?

The issue of "teacher evaluation" is moving towards Philly, and it would be wonderful for teachers to have more of a say in what it could look like. In order to do that, we'll all have to do a lot more research on effective teacher evaluation policy.  If we're going to influence our union to cultivate teacher voice more often, then we're going to have to have concrete ideas that we can get out in the public discourse.

I'm delighted that some site-based unions will be taking a closer look at teacher evaluation. I wonder where Philly's Teacher Action group is.

What do you think is effective teacher evaluation?  What does it look like?  How can it be designed to foster student engagement, teacher voice, and professional growth?