Teacher Evaluation

Most educators would say that effective teaching can make an enormous difference in how much and how well students learn. Research shows a series of highly effective teachers can boost a student’s test scores by the equivalent of three or more years of learning. But how do we identify an effective teacher? Consensus on that point is harder to come by.

For years, teachers in New York have been rated either S (“Satisfactory”) or U (“Unsatisfactory”) based on occasional observation by their principal. But that system is coming under increasing criticism. Teachers often worry that principals base their rating on subjective preferences. And such a simplistic up or down evaluation is of little use in identifying good teaching or in helping teachers develop their skills. Now, new evaluation systems are being tried in New York and across the country. Districts are creating what they hope are more objective rubrics for evaluating teachers in the classroom, ones that will use commonly agreed standards of good practice and will actually help teachers grow.

The call for new evaluation systems has been pushed forward by the recent development of a statistical method for evaluating teachers based on their students’ test scores called value-added modeling.

Teaching, of course, is a highly complex activity that requires many skills. A statistical formula based on test scores might be more objective, but it is based on a fairly narrow test and cannot control for many factors that affect student learning. Evaluation using the statistical model alone has been touted more by politicians and policy makers than by educators or knowledgeable researchers. A more accurate and useful evaluation system, educators say, would include both good measures of student learning and expert classroom evaluation.

Against this backdrop, New York State has been overhauling its evaluation system over the past year and a half. If properly implemented, the new system will embrace the growing consensus about the limits of any single measure of a teacher’s work. It should also further the profession by offering opportunities for continued professional growth and support.

So how do we “evaluate” evaluation systems? Here are some guidelines to help navigate the debate, pulled from recent research and experience. A good evaluation system should:

Advance a common vision of what good teaching looks like by providing professional teaching standards. Good teaching standards capture the best teaching practices without constricting teachers to prescribed methods of pedagogy. Professional teaching standards focus on many aspects of teaching such as the ability of the teacher to engage students, the teacher's content knowledge, and the teacher's ability to create an effective environment for learning. They discourage evaluators from judging teachers based on personal or “gut” reactions. Though it is teaching that is measured by the standards, learning is what is actually captured because teaching to high-quality standards facilitates learning.

Provide for the training of the evaluators. Evaluators must, of course, have significant experience as teachers, but teaching experience alone does not prepare principals, other administrators or peers to be evaluators. Training should be based on common rubrics for assessing effective teachers. Evaluations should not depend on who does the evaluating. Evaluators should have practice observing teachers and matching their findings with other evaluators. Some areas — such as planning and preparation — are not directly observable and must be assessed based on common guidelines. This kind of training leads to a shared understanding of the standards, consistent evaluations, and a better ability to distinguish a teacher’s strengths and weaknesses.

Include multiple measures. Student test performance is an important measure of learning, and teachers should be able to help students improve their scores. However, teaching is too complex to be caught in a “snapshot” test score. A fair evaluation should include multiple measures in addition to standardized test scores, such as expert, trained classroom-based observation over a substantial period of time; varying measures of student performance, including projects and performance-based assessments; and an assessment of the contributions that the teacher makes to the school community.

Provide a way to support and enhance the skills of all teachers. Teachers never stop learning. An evaluation should help them move forward professionally, improving their teaching practice, encouraging self-reflection and goal setting, and pointing the way to good professional development opportunities. Supports should also include access to the latest research and opportunities to share knowledge. All of these are at the heart of good teaching.

Include a mechanism by which the system can be monitored and then revised. Conditions change. What’s more, evaluation systems — even when well-implemented — do not always work out as planned. A good evaluation system must include a mechanism that allows all parties to review and evaluate how well the system is working and make improvements as needed.

Useful links

UFT Q&A on the new evaluation system

“The Widget Effect” by The New Teacher Project (2009) helped launch a nationwide critique of the state of teacher evaluation.

Charlotte Danielson has developed extensive rubrics for classroom observations. Here is a summary version of her approach from “Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching.” Her longer book by the same name is published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

A PowerPoint primer on value-added modeling from the AFT’s Albert Shanker Institute. And an AFT position paper on evaluation: AFT proposes a way forward on evaluation.

A report by the task force that drafted New York State’s new evaluation protocols: Regents task force report on teacher evaluation

Tackling teacher evaluation