« It's a Mystery? | Main | They're Not Your Children »

Cutting Edge or Blunt Instrument?

| 7 Comments

I don't need any new kitchen knives, but when a former student or kid from church calls and asks to come do a knife demonstration I watch one more time. I warn them that while I won't buy another knife, but I am happy to let them practice their presentation on me and to offer them a critique on their sales pitch. So every summer I watch and am asked to evaluate just how effectively those fine knives can cut through rope with a single stroke and how powerful those all purpose kitchen shears must be to cut a penny in half. And while I watch, I wonder: When and why would I need a kitchen knife that slices rope? We almost never have rope for dinner. Under what circumstances I would I cut up my spare change? I usually put it my pocket.

Still, it's a smart presentation design because the focus is on the tools, not the skill of person doing the demonstration. This makes sense, because while the knives are really are high quality tools, the college-age sales representatives often have more enthusiasm than knife handling skill. In fact, I can vividly recall the night that night Amy came to do the demonstration. While she cut the rope with a single stroke, she also managed to slice open her finger. She bled all over my kitchen table; she nearly pass out; and it took us half an hour to get her bandaged, cleaned up and calmed down.

These home sales demonstrations that supposedly evaluate the efficacy of kitchen knives can provide insight into why teachers are a bit skeptical of the accolades heaped on some of the new teacher evaluation systems by education reformers. Excellent tools are important; but sometimes it's more important to make sure a tool is appropriate for the job. And, no matter how good the tool and how well intended and highly motivated the user may be, the outcome is still dependent of that individual's knowledge and skill. Two new teacher evaluation scenarios in Washington, D.C. and New Haven, Connecticut have received a great deal of media attention lately, so let's take a look at those. A spokesperson for DC schools says,

What saves IMPACT is that it's clear for both teachers and evaluators. . . . There is no way a teacher can say, 'I don't understand how they expect me to plan lessons.' It's all there: setting ambitious and measurable goals, aligning each lesson with content standards, communicating goals to students." Allan Odden, a University of Wisconsin educational leadership expert, said IMPACT was "sophisticated, well thought through and, if executed well, will represent one of the most rigorous systems in the country."

Sounds like a good thing, but the Washington Teachers' Union is wary of IMPACT. Why? Because, the Washington Teachers Union has limited confidence in the skill of the those who will use the tool and have what seems to be legitimate concerns that a good evaluation tool can, and might be, used inappropriately. They are concerned about that "if executed well"part. Some would say that unions are just like that-- resistant to accountability and protective of their least effective members. But while WTU is locked in a bitter battle over teacher evaluation with D.C. Chancellor Michelle Rhee, it's sister AFT affliate represents teachers in New Haven, Connecticut where

The politically savvy American Federation of Teachers has decided that it is better to get in the game. In New Haven, the union has agreed in its new contract to develop an evaluation system in collaboration with the city. Secretary Duncan praised the agreement lavishly.

So what's the difference? It seems to me that the issue is not so much the instrument, but rather the credibility of the evaluators and the degree of trust that the evaluation results will be objective and that the outcome will be used appropriately. My good friend, Renee Moore, teaches in Mississippi, where there is no union collective bargaining for teachers. When she recently sat on a panel for the Forum for Education and Democracy's Capitol Hill briefing. Renee said that

My comments focused on what I believe are two closely related reasons why we do not have quality teachers for all students, particularly for those in high needs, high poverty areas: ineffective teacher evaluation and weak professional development/support..... The true culprit appears to be the what passes for teacher evaluation in most places. Apparently, we do not have systems that accurately identify teacher effectiveness or the degree of that effectiveness. Rigorous evaluation systems would not only identify quality teaching, but give each teacher a realistic, timely assessment of his/her work, identifying areas or strength and weakness; thereby, guiding professional development and support needs.

This is why teachers submit themselves to processes such as National Board for Professional Teaching Standards assessment, even when they have to pay for the process out of their own pocket and receive no additional compensation for this validation of their expertise. That's why it's frustrating when an editorial on the New Haven contract in the New York Times cautions that,

School reformers were excited to hear that New Haven planned to take student performance into account in its teacher evaluations. But they uttered a collective "uh-oh" upon hearing that the details -- including how much weight would be given to student performance -- would be hashed out by a committee that includes teachers and administrators.... Political leaders, school administrators, parents and everyone else who cares about improving education in this country will have to keep a close eye as this effort moves forward.

Now that confuses me. Does the writer really believe that teachers are obstructionists who have no stake in advancing teacher quality? Did he do his investigative work, asking teachers what they thought? Or did he just parrot what some school reform pundit told him?Teachers are regularly accused of just caring about the money and protecting their own jobs, but let's not forget that there's serious money to be made in school reform. In order to get press, prestige, power, and a paycheck as a reformer, you need to frame the problem and come up with a solution. Teachers are an easy mark because there are a lot of us and if you ever had a bad one, you'll never forget it. But, after the children, who pay the highest price for all the adult bickering, teachers have the most to lose. Yet,

Teachers, it turns out, are tougher on each other than anyone else, That's one of the lessons of Toledo's 25-year-old peer-review program, in which veteran teachers sift out the timid, disorganized, or otherwise unfit. Today some 70 NEA and AFT districts--mostly in California, Connecticut, and Ohio--use the approach. Teachers, least of all it seems, want to share the lunchroom with someone who can't hack it in the classroom.

I believe most teachers value meaningful assessment of their practice, and a well designed and thoughtfully administered evaluation can be the cutting edge tool to accomplish that goal. When that evaluation comes from peers, it sets a level of expectation for all participants, it creates an opportunity for meaningful professional sharing and growth, and it empowers skilled classroom practitioners to become part of the answer by giving them ownership of their profession. But, teachers have a legitimate concern that best cutting edge evaluation tool, when placed in unskilled or unbiased hands, could turn out to be nothing more than a blunt object for teacher bashing.

7 Comments

I have heard the same thing - that teachers are tougher on each other than adminstrators - from a district in Poway, CA, that has teachers forming the majority of an evaluative panel at the district level.

Well done, Susan!

It's the old "black box" argument: we don't care how teachers teach--we care only about the results. Completely missing the point, of course: it's the instructional effectiveness that causes the student learning gain. Let me say that again: good instruction improves student learning, whether the kids are in deepest poverty or taking AP Calculus. We have to care about evaluating instruction. What happens in the black box (which is much harder to pin down, in research design) matters, very much.

Great analogy, Susan. Good tools, inept users.

Nicely stated, Susan, as you usually do. I appreciate your sophisticated approach to sensitive issues.

Are you suggesting that if teachers do the evaluating of each other, then it's more likely that students will increase learning as expected by parents, state, and Federal programs? Since school administrators are also mostly certified teachers, that seems like a closed evaluation circuit. So, how do you see that loop increasing the odds for student learning meeting or exceeding minimum state academic performance standards?

Ah, excellent question, Bob. From many perspectives, a principal may look pretty much a teacher with a tie and a bigger paycheck; but I would argue that while the majority of principals may have once been certified teachers, my guess is that most of them have been out of the classroom a long time. Times change and skills go rusty and that's not an indictment, it's just what happens. At twenty-one I certified for a commercial license driving a standard transmission van, but I'm pretty sure that I'd lurch down the street grinding gears today and administrator teacher knowledge and skills can get rusty from lack of use and continuing education.

Besides, we ask too much of our principals. They are expected to head of finance, facilities, personnel, security, legal, research and development,and anything else that comes along. They simply do not have time to do in depth teacher evaluations. Their ongoing professional learning has had an administrative rather than an instructional focus, so they may have only a cursory knowledge the instructional initiatives in which their teachers are being trained.

Peer assessors are probably more familiar with current curriculum content and organization. If the peer assessors are true teacher leaders, they have credibility as a colleague who demonstrates walking the walk as well as talking the talk.

Here's what I'd really like to see:
External initial and ongoing assessment of content knowledge, because content knowledge needs to accurate and current. Peer assessment of instructional skills. Parent and/or student assessment of teacher dispositions and classroom management.Administrator assessment student records and professionalism. Guided, reflective self assessment for the purpose of improved practice.

If done right, the evaluative process would be diagnostic rather than judgmental and active rather than passive. What I'm wondering now is what sort of conditions, assurances, and safeguards would be necessary for peer evaluations to be attractive to all stakeholders? What barriers would have to be removed?

Dear Susan,

I was so impressed by this first article, I went back and read all of yours for the last two months. Twenty five years teaching junior high and high school science generates enormous empathy and appreciation for your eloquent articles.....ie.....RIGHT ON GIRL!

Teaching in the public schools is the most physically and emotionally demanding job I have ever had. Teachers are described as 'professionals' for if paid an hourly wage, I calculate our nation would be embarrased to learn that most teachers make less than minimum wage, even with the support of the demonized UNIONS! I firmly believe,as former science teacher, parent and current literacy coordinator at a non-profit that your voice needs to be heard OUTSIDE of this teaching blog. Children are not manufactured like cars, and even if they were, just look at has happened to that industry in spite of the UAW!

Hi Susan,
You ask what sort of conditions, assurances and safeguards would be necessary for all stakeholders? For me I would want to make sure there were no biases among those assessing my teaching - based on what I look like and how I taught. Then I would want my peers to check the progress of my students - not based on one test at the end of the year but proof of progress throughout the year. Finally I would want my expertise as a teacher to be evaluated, not based on one evaluation at a preset time, on my work as a teacher throughout the whole year. This would include the successes and failures of individual lessons but also on my students' accomplishments throughout the year. I guess what I want is a group to know me enough to know what I have done for my students throughout the year in order to evaluate me on my performance and this would include the progress my students have made as an end result. Is this a realistic goal for evaluation?

Hi Sherry,

I think your goals for teacher evaluations are completely realistic and it's ironic to me that after working to change teacher mindset to embrace "big picture" teaching there seems to be a movement toward "snapshot" evaluation of teacher practice. In a perfect world of teacher evaluation, I'd like to have multiple measures that include.

PART 1: Some kind of a benchmarked test on content.
PART 2: An observation by a neutral outside instructional expert that includes a pre and post conversation that encourages teachers to share how and why instructional decisions that inform and surround that lesson were made.

PART 3: Input from my colleagues on the quality of my instruction, assessment, classroom environment, and contribution to our learning community.

PART 4: The view of a building administrator on my ability to manage the logistics of record keeping, classroom management, and carrying a fair load within the professional community.

PART 5: Survey responses from parents and/or students regarding dispositions of the teacher and relevance of the material. Let's allow for tossing out outliers of both praise and complaints, because they may not be "instructional leaders" or "professional educators", customer satisfaction matters!

Yes, this is a lot to include, but once a teacher has completed a strong induction program it doesn't seem to onerous if the collection of data was staggered over a five year period. IMHO it makes more sense to evaluate less often but with more depth and meaning.

Comments are now closed for this post.

Advertisement

Recent Comments

  • Anonymous: Hi Sherry, I think your goals for teacher evaluations are read more
  • Sherry Vaughan: Hi Susan, You ask what sort of conditions, assurances and read more
  • Valerie Otto: Dear Susan, I was so impressed by this first article, read more
  • Susan Graham: Ah, excellent question, Bob. From many perspectives, a principal may read more
  • Bob Heiny: Nicely stated, Susan, as you usually do. I appreciate your read more

Archives

Categories

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here