Corrected: An earlier online version of this story misspelled Marcia Reback鈥檚 name.
The profile of teacher evaluation鈥攊n many school districts almost a pro forma exercise鈥攊s getting a boost.
A new report will warn that schools risk stalling the campaign to raise teacher quality if they do not take evaluation seriously. A panel discussion linked to the report last week echoed that conclusion. And the American Federation of Teachers recently set up a task force to promote a widely respected but little-used teacher-evaluation program pioneered by its Toledo, Ohio, affiliate.
鈥淭he troubled state of teacher evaluation is a glaring, and largely ignored, problem in public education,鈥 argued Thomas Toch, a co-director of the think tank Education Sector, introducing last week鈥檚 discussion of evaluation. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a lever of teacher and school improvement that鈥檚 being squandered.鈥
Mr. Toch is the author, along with Robert Rothman, of the report on the subject due out later this month.
The panel drew more than 125 education leaders and advocates here to the National Press Club.
鈥楳eaningless鈥 Exercises
Mr. Toch and the panelists decried the single classroom visit made by school administrators, checklist in hand, that too often constitutes teacher evaluation today. Because teachers are overwhelmingly paid on the basis of their years of experience and education, and rarely encounter any consequences from the evaluations, the evaluations have largely deteriorated into, in Mr. Toch鈥檚 words, 鈥渟uperficial, capricious, and often meaningless鈥 exercises.
Raymond Pecheone, who designed the nation鈥檚 first performance-based teacher-licensure system when he was in Connecticut and now directs the Performance Assessment of California Teachers program, acknowledged the 鈥渄ismal鈥 state of teacher evaluation. He said licensing systems such as the ones he has worked on took teacher performance seriously but were aimed at ensuring teacher competence, and less at building teacher capacity.
鈥淥ur generation tried to separate those functions,鈥 he said. 鈥淚 think the next generation will try to bring those functions together.鈥
The two teachers on the panel said an evaluation system geared to helping teachers improve鈥攁nd not just weeding them out or punishing them鈥攚as primary to winning teacher support.
鈥淚f the evaluation is of assistance to teachers, geared to helping teachers improve, it鈥檚 valued,鈥 said Marcia Reback, the president of the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals, who is chairing the AFT鈥檚 task force promoting the Toledo evaluation program, which focuses on beginning teachers. 鈥淚f it鈥檚 punitive, it鈥檚 frightening.鈥
Kaiulani Ivory, a 4th grade math and science teacher at the D.C. Preparatory Academy, a charter school in Washington that uses the Teacher Advancement Program, said the most important element of the program for teachers is its professional development. TAP combines new roles for teachers, accountability for student learning, and evaluations linked to both pay and professional development.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not just evaluation with nothing gained from it,鈥滿s. Ivory said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a coaching piece.
TAP and Toledo鈥檚 Peer Assistance and Review program are among the six 鈥渃omprehensive鈥 evaluation efforts Mr. Toch and Mr. Rothman examine in their report.
Role of Test Scores
The panelists agreed that evaluations should be centered on teachers鈥 classroom performance and student learning, which would open the way to compensation systems more closely linked to effectiveness than the vast majority of those now in place. Years on the job and college credits determine teacher pay in most districts, and except for the first few years of teaching, experience and education are at best uncertainly linked to teachers鈥 ability to induce student learning.
Still, views diverged over the roots of the resistance to evaluations and to the relative role that should be played by student test scores in evaluating teachers.
Christopher Cerf, the deputy chancellor of the New York City schools, said teachers鈥 鈥渄eep antipathy鈥 to 鈥渕eaningful鈥 evaluations springs from a public school culture that allows credentials and tenure to stand in for classroom effectiveness. He posited a 鈥渃hasm鈥 between some union leaders鈥 efforts to push a teacherquality agenda and the life of most schools.
鈥淚鈥檓 unapologetic that test scores must be a central component of evaluation,鈥 Mr. Cerf added. He said that whatever the flaws of tests, the scores of children in, say, 4th grade tend to predict the likelihood they will land in jail, be healthy or not, and reach a particular level of lifetime earnings, among other outcomes.
But others pointed to problems in using test scores that must be overcome: the fact that they generally measure low-level skills and that half of classroom teachers don鈥檛 teach tested subjects.
Even with lack of agreement on student test scores in teacher evaluation, the panelists generally endorsed a 鈥渕ultiple measures鈥 approach. Mr. Toch said his research had turned up several features an evaluation system should have. They include a view of what good teaching is, captured in standards and descriptions; reliance on several measures of performance, some gauged by different evaluators over time; and ties to teaching improvement.
Mr. Toch said the battle over test scores may ease if evidence continues to accumulate that the kind of comprehensive observation and investigation of teacher performance in the classroom that he proposes correlates with teachers鈥 ability to raise test scores.
Several experts said that peer review should be a pillar of evaluation, in part because there is too much work for administrators to do well and in part because it promotes teacher buy-in. Yet whoever does the work, the experts agreed, it is expensive to do well, and school districts have been reluctant to shift the estimated $14 billion a year they spend on professional development into the process. Nor have most teachers鈥 unions made evaluation a spending priority.
Tool for Change
Education scholars who did not attend last week鈥檚 meeting also welcomed the spotlight on teacher evaluation.
Thomas J. Kane, an economist at Harvard University鈥檚 graduate school of education who has looked at the relationship between principals鈥 observations of teacher effectiveness and teacher effectiveness as measured by student test-score gains, said it was high time districts turned their attention to evaluation, which he characterized as 鈥渢heir most potent tool鈥 for improving teacher quality.
And he urged that information on teachers鈥 capacity to raise student test scores be used to improve the instruments that assess teachers鈥 classroom behavior.
