Holding Pattern

With the continued debate on teacher evaluation being tied to test scores it is interesting that the CORE (California Office to Reform Education) are divided on the implementation of an evaluation system that would incorporate such a venture.  Currently LAUSD and Long Beach Unified have signed on to include the agreed upon system as stipulated in the NCLB waiver. The options for teacher evaluation reads as follows

• The Massachusetts alternative: Based on that state’s NCLB waiver, results from standardized and other tests would be used indirectly, as a check. If test scores didn’t agree with an evaluation based on classroom observations and other criteria, the district would take a second look to identify the discrepancy and could create a one-year improvement plan for the teacher.

• The 20 percent minimum: Growth in student achievement, based a model that the CORE districts will develop, will comprise a minimum of 20 percent of a teacher’s or principal’s evaluation. Districts with their own models, like Los Angeles Unified, could seek approval to use their variations from the CORE board of directors.

EdSource August 6th, 2013

So what does this mean for teachers. So far I have not found any information about how this fits into the collective bargaining agreement for these districts, but I do know that the remaining districts have not agreed to any stipulations regarding the teacher evaluation component.  For LAUSD and LBUSD the evaluation system is negotiated.  Still there are huge gaps in the Massachusetts alternative in that test scores for standardized tests are no longer relevant as California transitions to the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) tests. Even looking at the 20 percent minimum is problematic in that it requires a solid background in what constitutes student achievement and how that can be accurately measured considering the myriad of variables that can enhance or inhibit student achievement.

Being a secondary teacher who no longer is required to give the CST 8th grade History test which in itself was a totally unfair and inaccurate test of student achievement (it tested students for 6th, 7th, and 8th grade material), I find relief from not having to focus on testing.  However, how is student achievement measured?  If it were to focus on grades, one would assume that if the majority of students are failing a class, the teacher is ineffective. I would dispute that of course. So it behooves educators and administrators to create a accurate measure of student achievement.  This is not something that is thrown together in a few short meetings.  Furthermore since teaching at the elementary, intermediate, and high school vary immensely due to subjects and other variables how is one to find a common ground for student achievement.  

I am not saying that this impossible, but that it requires considerable thought and input from all stakeholders.  Ultimately, teachers are looking for a method that provides for comprehensible input that allows for them to grow as a professional.  They are not looking to be thrown under the bus by tyrannical leaders whose goal is to rid their site of teachers who are not in line with their agenda nor are they looking for the run of the mill evaluations with the usual platitudes that one may seem every time they are evaluated.

Thus I am looking forward to receiving input from our district's teachers who are the best measure of what is needed in a teacher evaluation.  With some effort I hope we will be able to change the current system which has no considerable impact on most teacher's instruction.