Just Don't Throw Us Under the Bus

There is most certainly a very interesting tidal wave on the horizon. And in the mighty seas that are swirling these days in education, that's no small feat (to create a potential tsunami that is teacher evaluation, that is. See here for the Obama chides California article which this blog post references).

Now, I have no problem with accountability. And no one is above it. I do have a problem, however, with evaluating a professional based on what I consider to be a weak, and quite possibly, inadequate means of assessment to make one's decision... but I am holding back judgement right now on this Arne Duncan/Obama plan.

See, I think the tests are flawed to a degree. I believe we need growth model assessments to see how much kids learn over the course of the year under the direction of an educator in order to be able to fairly evaluate that educator. Otherwise, by comparing this year's students to last year's kids, it's really apples to oranges (as I have said many times). How my 10 graders measure up this year should be based on where their skills were when they started the year with me -- and then we can see their "growth" (there's that word again). However, to evaluate my 10th graders this year against my 10 graders last year is practically an arbitrary comparison. All kids are different and if we can't agree on that, then we can't agree on much at all.

Additionally, my hope is that in this plan comes a recogniztion that there are a few different criteria to "evaluate" teachers -- and please tell me that there are more tricks up their sleeves than the simple "kids taking bubble tests in May" approach which so often favor the upper socio-economic areas of our nation.

For example, a teacher who works in a suburban school with a population of kids where 98% of their parents went to college is, if we use our present data system, going to have students that (for the most part) outperform students where greater than 50% of the kids are English language learners.

Sure there might be some anomalies but for the most part this data holds true. The more wealth and education that the parents own in a community, the higher the test scores.

But, does this mean that the teachers who work in elevated socioeconomic areas are "better" teachers than those who do not?

Really... I question it. Because as of right now, I do not see how the teacher evaluation system that is being proposed does not seem to slant towards this end result. (Yet, I am trying to be patient, reserve judgement and wait to see what is actually on the table for all of this.)

But if it does end up that the teacher evaluation system slopes towards this end result, it's almost un-American.

Two scenarios: Teacher 1 in the suburbs with kids who get high test scores. Teacher 2 in a Title 1 school with all the problems that run attendant to our nation's lowest performing academic institutions.

Test time comes and the students of Teacher 1 outperform the students of Teacher 2. No one is shocked by the way by the result of their bubble tests.

Now, does this mean that the teacher in scenario 1 in the suburbs is a "better" teacher? Does it mean that the teacher in scenario #2, if the kids struggle to even read the tests, is a worse teacher? See this is where the problem exists for so many. And for me, I don't want to stop working with the Title I population in inner city Los Angeles.

I LOVE IT!! However, I also don't want the tests to demonize me as not measuring up because on the whole, my students do not score on these bubble tests at the same level of proficiency as kids who have lawyers, doctors and MBAs for parents.

American society is bifurcated along socioeconomic/class divides and while we all want to be rich, the truth is, all of us are not... and there are a great many of us striving to do 10 dollars worth of work with 5 dollars worth of resources.

My fear is that, unless these teacher evaluations take into consideration all the other mitigating factors that go into making for a really "great professional" what we are going to see is that folks who work in areas where the families have solid educational backgrounds and deep financial pockets are going to be rewarded while the folks who work in our more "troubled areas" are going to inevitably thrown under the bus.

And that is, as I have said many times before, un-American. Accountability is fine as long as it is not used as a weapon and if this plan is going to chase everyone to pursue jobs where the kids are already high-performers even before the school year starts, then we are going to do a disservice to the kids who most need our attention, care, solid efforts and skills.

0 members like this

Comment by Joe Fatheree on July 27, 2009 at 8:16am: Education does need a major facelift in this country. We are currently in the process of evaluating the system and trying to find a way to pay for the recommendations. I believe it is also extremely important to conduct a survey in order to determine who the key players are. I would highly encourage teachers to be included in the process. Likewise, I would like to encourage teachers to stand up and become involved in the process. We cannot sit idly by and expect others to represent our profession. The teachers voice is unique. The lawmakers may create the policy, but it is the classroom teacher who sees it play out in a million different ways day after day. That first hand information is invaluable, and needs to be heard in every discussion that is currently being held on educational reform.

The fact is that it is going to take a lot of different players to create a mass reform that works. Works is the key word in that sentence. If we are going to invest billions of dollars, countless hours, and understand that the quality of life for millions of Americans is at stake, then we need to do it right. Successful reform is only possible if the plan is well developed and a strong line of communication has been formed between all key stakeholders. Arrogance and hidden agendas need to be left out of the room. In my opinion, there is room for improvement in that area. A few years ago, Margaret Spellings said of NCLB, “It is like Ivory soap, 99% pure.” I would have had to work a long time to conjure up a statement, which was that ignorant. It didn’t take a rocket scientist to have noticed NCLB had some glaring weaknesses right out of the gate. In fact, teachers and administrators all across the nation started saying so almost as soon as the law was passed. Unfortunately, the current system is not set up to create change on the fly. That coupled with a few ounces of arrogance from the previous administration and an educational workforce who locked their legs in the sand forced a stalemate. Yes, some change did happen; for the good and the bad. In the end, there was more distrust from both sides than ever before. A bad taste was left in the mouths of almost everyone involved in the process.

The current administration has made strides to reverse the effects and create a feeling of trust. The cute little buildings outside the DOE were taken down. Even the name of the law is being changed. However, it is going to take a lot more than that to move this ship forward.
I don’t have a problem with student achievement being tied to teacher evaluations. In fact, I think it should be a part of the equation. However, I also think it should be tied to the evaluations of building administrators, superintendents, state boards of education, our state and federal leaders, and yes even parents. Why is that necessary? The answer to that question is quite simple. In the end, we are ALL responsible for the success of our children. There are no innocent bystanders. Everyone is involved in the game. It is time that we stand up and understand that fact.

The way we measure also has to change. In Illinois, we are in the process of developing a data system that will track student performance over the course of their academic careers. I applaud the effort, and think it is a great first step. However, the data has to find its way quickly into the hands of the teachers for it to be the most effective. For it to work, the data has to be easy to understand. Teachers and administrators have to know how to interpret the data in order for each student to benefit. Administrators to need know how to use the data to decide how to create a climate that is conducive to learning in their buildings and how to build professional development activities that will provide their teachers with the tools to raise student achievement. They also need to have enough funding available to provide those tools for their teachers.

We also need to understand that the systems we are developing may come with flaws built into them. Rarely, is there a new model developed that rolls off the assembly line without error. It should come as no surprise that flaws will begin to surface once the systems are tested. So let’s build a system that allows us to fix those errors on the fly. Think how effective Margaret Spellings could have been had she not only admitted the system had flaws but asked for the nation’s teachers to help her fix it. As a nation, we need to learn from our mistakes. Let’s build a system that is really built on the best interest of the kids. Let’s stop using idle threats, and make something that will have a positive effect on this country for generations to come.

In closing, I don’t think that teachers need to run in fear of the change that President Obama is requesting. On our part, I do think that we need to stand up in unison and ask to help create the process. There are many many many teachers across the country that would be willing to do that today. President Obama is responsible for a creating a system that will allow us to do so. I hope that he not only reaches out and asks for help in creating the change, but will build a system that will allow us to do so.

-joe

Comment by Alan Sitomer on July 27, 2009 at 8:40am: Like Ivory soap? I missed that one. Too bad we do not have it for You Tube right now. Goodness, would I love to see a mash up with that in it!