Gan
08-13-2007, 12:56 PM
A mere three-tenths of 1 percent of Chicago public school teachers receive "unsatisfactory" evaluations. A recent study by the New Teacher Project, a national non-profit aimed at raising the caliber of public school teachers, also found that even among the district's 87 most demonstrably failing schools, 80 percent hadn't issued an "unsatisfactory" rating to a teacher.
Either that's one astounding teaching force, or the Chicago Public Schools' evaluation system is whacked.
Call us cynics, but we favor the latter interpretation.
The specific problem here is not the teachers. It's an evaluation system so bogus that it provides mediocre and poor teachers with a false sense that they're doing well -- and, just as bad -- fails to reward the highest performing educators for their excellent work.
It's also a system fraught with conflicts of interest. Principals may be reluctant to issue low performance ratings to teachers who, say, serve on Local School Councils, which in turn are responsible for...the principals' evaluations. And with a contract that makes it virtually impossible to fire a tenured dud of a teacher, many principals see no point in issuing a bad rating.
That's unfortunate because meaningful job evaluations are critical professional development tools. They can ensure that only the best teachers are granted tenure after a four-year probation and can help keep experienced teachers focused. They also can help determine which teachers need extra support.
The Chicago Teachers Union and CPS recognize the need for a better evaluation system. They've worked together to develop new criteria that are more specific and sophisticated.
But even that new blueprint, not yet released, contains one glaring and unacceptable omission: It fails to link teacher evaluations to student outcomes. Are kids learning?
Not all teaching positions can easily be linked to test scores; take music or art, for instance. But even those positions can have explicit standards for what general concepts students should master, and what kind of planning, student evaluation and communication skills teachers should demonstrate in the classroom.
Nobody is suggesting that teachers be evaluated solely on student scores. But student performance is, after all, why they're teaching.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0813edit1aug13,0,3665373.story
_______________________________________________
Thought this might be of interest...
How should schools be evaluated?
We have the TAKS test here in Texas, and with several family members in the ranks as Teachers they find it hard that almost all of the cirriculum nowdays is based around taking the tests instead of learning.
I'm not a huge fan of generic tests simply because they fail to adequately (IMO) serve as an accurate overview of a student's knowledge. Especially if the test is accompanied by anxiety, poor creation/question foundation, etc. In essence, I hate standardized tests simply because they fail to hit the mark with judging student performance.
However, what other methods are available to judge a student's level of learning and knowledge acquisition?
Either that's one astounding teaching force, or the Chicago Public Schools' evaluation system is whacked.
Call us cynics, but we favor the latter interpretation.
The specific problem here is not the teachers. It's an evaluation system so bogus that it provides mediocre and poor teachers with a false sense that they're doing well -- and, just as bad -- fails to reward the highest performing educators for their excellent work.
It's also a system fraught with conflicts of interest. Principals may be reluctant to issue low performance ratings to teachers who, say, serve on Local School Councils, which in turn are responsible for...the principals' evaluations. And with a contract that makes it virtually impossible to fire a tenured dud of a teacher, many principals see no point in issuing a bad rating.
That's unfortunate because meaningful job evaluations are critical professional development tools. They can ensure that only the best teachers are granted tenure after a four-year probation and can help keep experienced teachers focused. They also can help determine which teachers need extra support.
The Chicago Teachers Union and CPS recognize the need for a better evaluation system. They've worked together to develop new criteria that are more specific and sophisticated.
But even that new blueprint, not yet released, contains one glaring and unacceptable omission: It fails to link teacher evaluations to student outcomes. Are kids learning?
Not all teaching positions can easily be linked to test scores; take music or art, for instance. But even those positions can have explicit standards for what general concepts students should master, and what kind of planning, student evaluation and communication skills teachers should demonstrate in the classroom.
Nobody is suggesting that teachers be evaluated solely on student scores. But student performance is, after all, why they're teaching.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0813edit1aug13,0,3665373.story
_______________________________________________
Thought this might be of interest...
How should schools be evaluated?
We have the TAKS test here in Texas, and with several family members in the ranks as Teachers they find it hard that almost all of the cirriculum nowdays is based around taking the tests instead of learning.
I'm not a huge fan of generic tests simply because they fail to adequately (IMO) serve as an accurate overview of a student's knowledge. Especially if the test is accompanied by anxiety, poor creation/question foundation, etc. In essence, I hate standardized tests simply because they fail to hit the mark with judging student performance.
However, what other methods are available to judge a student's level of learning and knowledge acquisition?