Teacher evaluation has long been in need of an overhaul for both teachers and administration alike. Just like the educational system is no longer focused on the industrialized method of teaching (where every kid receives the same instruction the same exact way), teacher evaluation can no longer be focused on one snapshot moment of teaching. In the past teachers have been evaluated on a single moment within their classroom. The evaluation focused on a variety of topics across the state but never has focused on the improvement of the teacher. The principal would evaluate the teacher; the teacher would get the results; teaching would go on without much focus on what the teacher could or should improve, or where to go for help if needed. In August 2015, North Dakota Department of Public Instruction (DPI) set out to standardize teacher evaluation across the state to improve student achievement. The purpose of the new guidelines was to create a unified system to build high-quality teachers from evaluations and not just licensure alone. According to the ND Teacher Evaluation guidelines, the purpose of evaluations should provide: continual improvement of instruction and student outcomes; meaningful differentiation of performances; the use of multiple valid measures including data; evaluations of teachers on regular basis; provision of clear, timely and useful feedback; use results to inform improvement of teachers’ overall performance and personal decisions (Baesler, 2). The
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Throughout this semester we have read and discussed instructional leadership styles on what to do and what not to do. We have also applied these styles during in-class scenario sessions. During the last few weeks we have focused on the evaluation process of instructional leadership. Whether you are a teacher, nurse, military personnel, or janitor, you will have formal evaluations throughout your career, but few of us truly understand and become proficient at the process. Thus, DiPaola and Hoy (2014) discuss in chapter eight why, how, and what we evaluate personnel on, while chapter nine discusses the actual process of conducting evaluations.
Since 1997, the primary tool for teacher evaluation was the Professional Development and Appraisal System better known as PDAS. Due to significant efforts to enhance both teacher effectiveness and “student learning and growth,” the Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS) was elaborated (TEA, 2016, p. 3). The T-TESS was designed by educators to support continuous improvement by focusing on “feedback and support,” “moving the mindset away from compliance” (TEA, 2016, p. 3).
As schools across the nation look for a uniform method to evaluate teachers’ performances, concerns about both methods are highlighted. NYC is using the Danielson Framework to evaluate teachers this year; some concerns have been brought up by administrators and the teachers union. In the piliot program it was noted by one administrator that “some of her teachers are not scoring as high on the rubric as she would expect — precisely because the rubric expects the same general characteristics in all grades” (Cromidas, 2012). This is because in the Danielson Framework the observer is looking for weather a teacher is doing the behavior or not. Check mark - there is no distinction between a new teacher and a veteran teacher. The other thing that administrators are noting that the “practicing observing teachers using Danielson had proved to be time-consuming” (Cromidas, 2012). It is recommend that they observer spends a number of informal observations lasting at least 15 minutes in the classroom before the official observation and that the report be turned around in 48 hours to the teacher.
Teachers are rated as developing, proficient, accomplished, distinguished. The evaluation tool, which was updated in 2008 and in 2015 standard six was added, consist of six total standards. Standard one assesses teacher’s leadership skills. Teachers must demonstrate leadership in their classroom and in the school. Teachers must demonstrate their ability to improve the profession, advocate and assist with implementation for positive change in policies and practices affecting student learning. all while demonstrate ethical principles including honesty, integrity, fair treatment, and respect for others. For standard two teachers must demonstrate their ability establish a respect environment for a diverse population of students which involves nurturing relationships with child, embracing diversity in all forms
Just like this week’s content, my school is a “mixed bag” of evaluations. First, we have our Head Start Program, which is federally funded, so they have their own evaluations. These evaluations consist of “board members” coming in to evaluate/assess the teacher and classroom as well as meetings that the teacher and her paraprofessional have to attend every other month. These meetings help them focus on the current curriculum that their program has in place to ensure that the program is doing what it is meant to do.
Although the same rubric is used for teacher observations, evaluators can differ in their style of rating and what expectations they have for the teacher. This causes an inconsistency between the evaluation of teachers in the same building, let alone in different districts. There are parts of the rubric that are up for interpretation, so there is no way for all evaluations to be scored in the same way. This evaluation can also put a lot of pressure on a new teacher who is unsure of what is expected and may not feel completely comfortable within the job as a first year teacher. A “needs improvement” rating should not be considered unsatisfactory if the teacher is willing to improve and work towards goals set by him or her or the
In 2013 the Englewood public school system adopted the Danielson framework to evaluate teachers. Prior to the Danielson framework teachers we evaluated through a district created evaluation system. The change to the Danielson evaluation too was very tumultuous as the administrator as well as the teachers had to become acclimated to the new method. Unlike the previous measurement tool Danielson divided teaching practice into four domains. Each domain address different aspects of teaching practice that once achieved is supposed to resulting in more effective teaching and higher student academic achievement. Each domain has a level
Holding educators to student performances on standardized tests is a current trend being utilized by state and local school boards, but the standards to which teachers are being held are vague and leave teachers lost on how to improve their craft. In 2013, the Bill and Melissa Gates Foundation funded a study of current teacher practices in order to identify effective strategies linked to increased student achievement. The data obtained from the study lead to discussions surrounding the current teacher evaluation process. Those discussions have led to a realization that evaluations tied to specific teacher feedback appeared to have greater impact on teacher improvement and as a result, increased student achievement (Goodwin & Hein, 2016). In the search for any artifacts involving the formalization of teacher evaluations, one article provided a guideline which state and local educational governing bodies could use when creating evaluation criteria for teachers. According to the findings cited in the article, “developing a comprehensive teacher evaluation system is far from straight forward [and] policymakers should make every effort to ensure teachers are being evaluated fairly and accurately” (Hull,
Education reform takes on different forms depending on the goals of reformers. However, most will agree their ultimate goal is to positively impact student achievement. Changes in public education continues to increase teacher accountability, as well as, update curriculum standards and standardized tests. The teacher evaluation system is one focus of recent initiatives. While district implement new teacher evaluation methods, skepticism surrounds its effectiveness, in improving teaching, and comprehensiveness, in assessing the multi-faceted role a teacher plays in the lives of students. I have experienced the good, bad, and ugly of the teacher evaluation system of Shelby County.
Herbert bravely sets his sights upon the sacred cow of the educational system, teacher quality. By boldly holding teachers accountable for the outcomes of their students, Herbert describes the road map needed for improvement. Describing how high performing teachers had astonishing results with under-performing students provided the reader with a concrete example of the changes that he believes are needed. Providing the reader with current practices of school districts, these being a focus on credentials of the teacher’s, rather than on their quality inside the classroom. Job performance must be assessed within a classroom in order to prepare the students for the future. “Studies have clearly shown that the good teachers and the not-so-good ones can actually be identified, if they are carefully observed in
According to Earl (2013), expert teachers know about learning, know about the subjects they teach, and have a deep knowledge of pedagogy (p. 125). Highly effective teachers develop pedagogical skills to support and produce achievement. As educators develop proficient students, instructional leaders must identify and develop highly effective teachers. How might an instructional leader determine the impact of teacher effectiveness on student achievement levels? The purpose of this study is to determine the correlation between teachers Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR) ratings and teachers’ Quality of Distribution Index
In the state of South Dakota, the legal requirements of the state and school districts when it comes to supervision and procedures, expectations align with both. The state of South Dakota has adopted the Teacher Effectiveness Model along with any district that is state accredited. This model is based on the Danielson framework, which consists of 22 components, clustered into domains one through four (Danielson, 2007). According to this model, teachers from year one to year three are evaluated at least annually and those teachers year four and beyond are evaluated at least every other year. The state formed a work group made up of teachers and administrators who developed an evaluation instrument that will not only be a tool for administrators to use, but also for teachers.
Obviously, the results of the program have the opposite of the desired effect. Teachers cannot continue abandon students in need and expect things to change. In reality, these evaluations are hurting teachers so much that they base their effectivity solely on scores (Froese-Germain). Oftentimes, evaluations undermine teamwork and collectivity among teachers, and on top of that, the teachers are opposed to this method of computing compensation (Froese-Germain). Programs that divide rather than unite need revamped or replaced, otherwise teachers’ perception of achievement will decrease, teamwork will fall apart, and entire districts will suffer.
I agree and disagree with the author in these articles. I thought the changing the teacher evaluation process can be a bad thing and a good thing. I think that teachers should be graded hard on their evaluations, but not too hard that it impossible for teacher to earn tenure. Teachers goals shouldn’t be to earn tenure, but if they teaching their students well. And making an impact in the students’ lives. Tenure is a good idea because everyone should feel safe in their jobs, and feel like they’re won’t get fired. I understand why the state want to make the evaluations harder for teacher, because they want the best teachers in the schools. If there are teachers that getting bad grades on their evaluations then they might not be the best teachers to be teaching children. I think teachers shouldn’t be evaluation be based on 50 percent on students’ standardized-test scores because students could be really bad at tests and then do badly on the test. Teachers could be scored badly on different reasons to like students in low- income families, and students who have disabilities. "Legislators are trying to justify their voting for this bill on the grounds that it increased funding, but that's in many respects to distract from the fact that they voted for things they didn't understand that might end up being damaging to teachers' careers.” I thought that was interesting because it will be damaging that the people who agreeing with these bills don’t understanding what they’re voting for things. This knowledge could be useful to me when I become a teacher because I will be evaluation as a teacher. It is good to know new laws that are being passed with teachers’ evaluations and tenure. It good to know how you are being evaluation, and how you can earn tenure.