Content area
Full Text
Let's begin by considering the deficiencies of traditional systems.
* Outmoded evaluative criteria, usually in the form of checklists.
* Simplistic evaluative comments, such as "needs improvement," "satisfactory," and "outstanding" without consistency as to what those words mean. Many teachers end up being rated at the highest level on every item, with no guidance toward improvement.
* The same procedures for both novice teachers and career professionals, and therefore, no differentiation that reflects veteran teachers' experience and expertise.
* Lack of consistency among evaluators; a teacher might be rated at the highest level by one administrator and much lower by another. This makes it much easier to attain tenure in some schools than in others, a violation of a fundamental principle of equity.
* One-way, top-down communication. Evaluation is a process that's "done to" teachers, and it often feels punitive.
Why Do We Evaluate Teachers?
We can remedy these problematic characteristics by attending to some basic principles of assessment and teacher learning. First, it helps to be clear about why we even have teacher evaluation. Laws, of course, require it. But why? The most fundamental reason is because public schools take public money, and the public has a right to expect high-quality teaching. But there are two more basic purposes.
Purpose 1: To ensure teacher quality. Credibility in an evaluation system is essential. A principal or a superintendent must be able to say to the school board and the public, "Everyone who teaches here is good - and here's how I know." An evaluation system that satisfies this requirement will include:
* A consistent definition of good teaching. It's not sufficient to say, "I can't define good teaching, but I know it when I see it." One of the most widely used systems that defines good teaching is the Framework for Teaching, which describes the teaching that occurs in the classroom but also behind-the-scenes planning and other professional work, such as communicating with families and participating in a professional community. For each component of good teaching, the framework includes four levels of performance - unsatisfactory, basic, proficient, and distinguished - that describe the degrees of teacher expertise in that component. To learn more about the framework, visit www.danielsongroup.org/ theframeteach.htm.
* A shared understanding of this...