Full Version: Teacher Evaluations
After a failed attempt to get this thread rolling Sunday, I am re-launching it with some major modifications and some treasured input from one of the mods.
Before I get to the heart of this threads, I want to set the stage by telling a story, but please don't read too much into this.
In another thread, I mentioned Miss Lacy, my 8th and 9th grade English teacher. Being kids, we did not like the long deceased Miss Lacy. She was strict, at times rude and we “thought” absolutely the meanest person god ever created.
After getting settled in her room, Miss Lacy would call roll and ask each student if they had their English homework. Those who didn’t were put on a one hour detention list. In two years, I missed having mine only once. When I told her “no” that day she said, “BoF you usually have yours, so be sure to bring it tomorrow with today’s homework.”
It wasn’t until the 10th grade that I realized how much I had learned from Miss Lacy, and it wasn’t until I became a teacher myself that I understood what Miss Lacy was really doing. Students thought they were being punished, but in fact, Miss Lacy was setting up a tutoring program that in a backhanded was way was kind rather than cruel.
Being bad in jr. high (now middle school) was cool,
being dumb wasn’t. 
Miss Lacy’s strategy was to bring those kids who didn’t have the homework in for tutoring without them or anyone else even knowing it.
She spent an extra hour tutoring (without pay) at the expense of making herself one of the most despised teachers in the school. She had a thick skin, but I imagine there were days she went home heart broken and emotionally bruised.
When I started teaching in FWISD 1975, teachers had an annual evaluation. The form used for evaluation was simple. There were eight categories. Principals would observe a teacher, rate them as needs improvement, satisfactory, above average or outstanding. Principals routinely made comments in each category. The “averages,” “outstandings,” etc were average and we had a rating for that teacher.
I don’t know how it is in other states, but educational reform started in Texas in 1984. Part of the reform was a new evaluation system. First, we had the Texas Teacher Appraisal System (TTAS) and now the Professional Development Appraisal System (PDAS). The PDAS weighted professional growth, often attending in-service meetings, heavier than previous evaluation systems. To simplify this if possible, evaluations have gone from formal to informal.
Here’s a link to the state’s current evaluation system:
http://www.coe.tamu.edu/studentteaching/doc/supervision.pdf
Here's another link to the type preperation offered to help teachers do well on the current evaluation system.
http://dept.lamar.edu/leadership/Syllabi/E...um%20I%20o5.doc
Both links are PDF.
Questions for Debate
1. What are the advantages/advantages of informal vs. formal teacher evaluations.
2. Which do you think is better?
3. Do you think a teacher like Miss Lacy would do better, worse or about the same on formal or informal evaluations?
Note: While the word “premise” makes one sound erudite, I don’t think is necessarily applicable to starting a thread. I don’t think one can start threads 100% of the time without bias, but I do make an attempt. Starting with a “premise” would, I think, bias a thread. The questions I have asked are open-ended. Feel free to argue as many sets of premises as you wish.
Definition of premise:
http://www.answers.com/topic/premise
Before I get to the heart of this threads, I want to set the stage by telling a story, but please don't read too much into this.
**********
In another thread, I mentioned Miss Lacy, my 8th and 9th grade English teacher. Being kids, we did not like the long deceased Miss Lacy. She was strict, at times rude and we “thought” absolutely the meanest person god ever created.
After getting settled in her room, Miss Lacy would call roll and ask each student if they had their English homework. Those who didn’t were put on a one hour detention list. In two years, I missed having mine only once. When I told her “no” that day she said, “BoF you usually have yours, so be sure to bring it tomorrow with today’s homework.”
It wasn’t until the 10th grade that I realized how much I had learned from Miss Lacy, and it wasn’t until I became a teacher myself that I understood what Miss Lacy was really doing. Students thought they were being punished, but in fact, Miss Lacy was setting up a tutoring program that in a backhanded was way was kind rather than cruel.
Being bad in jr. high (now middle school) was cool,
being dumb wasn’t. Miss Lacy’s strategy was to bring those kids who didn’t have the homework in for tutoring without them or anyone else even knowing it.She spent an extra hour tutoring (without pay) at the expense of making herself one of the most despised teachers in the school. She had a thick skin, but I imagine there were days she went home heart broken and emotionally bruised.
**********
When I started teaching in FWISD 1975, teachers had an annual evaluation. The form used for evaluation was simple. There were eight categories. Principals would observe a teacher, rate them as needs improvement, satisfactory, above average or outstanding. Principals routinely made comments in each category. The “averages,” “outstandings,” etc were average and we had a rating for that teacher.
I don’t know how it is in other states, but educational reform started in Texas in 1984. Part of the reform was a new evaluation system. First, we had the Texas Teacher Appraisal System (TTAS) and now the Professional Development Appraisal System (PDAS). The PDAS weighted professional growth, often attending in-service meetings, heavier than previous evaluation systems. To simplify this if possible, evaluations have gone from formal to informal.
Here’s a link to the state’s current evaluation system:
http://www.coe.tamu.edu/studentteaching/doc/supervision.pdf
Here's another link to the type preperation offered to help teachers do well on the current evaluation system.
http://dept.lamar.edu/leadership/Syllabi/E...um%20I%20o5.doc
Both links are PDF.
Questions for Debate
1. What are the advantages/advantages of informal vs. formal teacher evaluations.
2. Which do you think is better?
3. Do you think a teacher like Miss Lacy would do better, worse or about the same on formal or informal evaluations?
**********
Note: While the word “premise” makes one sound erudite, I don’t think is necessarily applicable to starting a thread. I don’t think one can start threads 100% of the time without bias, but I do make an attempt. Starting with a “premise” would, I think, bias a thread. The questions I have asked are open-ended. Feel free to argue as many sets of premises as you wish.
Definition of premise:
QUOTE
A proposition upon which an argument is based or from which a conclusion is drawn.
http://www.answers.com/topic/premise
Well, I don't see why there can't be a reasonable combination of both formal and informal systems. Using just one or the other exclusively seems like it could be a problem. If it is purely formal, than a great teacher who doesn't like going to continuing education meetings may get a poor evaluation. (Instead of just saying something like "You're doing a fine job, but you might want to think about getting some CE.") If the system is purely informal, a medicore teacher who happens to be nice and well-liked may get a good evaluation.
Perhaps the way to go would be with a list of minimal standards (showing up on time, and so on) along with a place for subjective evaluation by an experienced supervisor. It might also be possible to supply some objective data on how effective the teacher's methods are in the classroom. (How well do the teacher's students do on college entrance exams, for example, with other factors allowed for.)
I think Miss Lacy might do well on such a mixed system.
Perhaps the way to go would be with a list of minimal standards (showing up on time, and so on) along with a place for subjective evaluation by an experienced supervisor. It might also be possible to supply some objective data on how effective the teacher's methods are in the classroom. (How well do the teacher's students do on college entrance exams, for example, with other factors allowed for.)
I think Miss Lacy might do well on such a mixed system.
Questions for Debate
1. What are the advantages/advantages of informal vs. formal teacher evaluations.
Formal evaluations are expected performance reviews and IMO will work better than “informal” reviews. Informal implies a lower standard for judging to me.
2. Which do you think is better?
Formal. And we need to go well beyond just “reviews”. Teachers must have majored in subjects that they teach, or at least minored. Too many teachers are totally unqualified to teach in many subject areas esp. math and science. Add to that the teachers who cannot even pass the certification exams and you understand why we have one of the worst education systems in the industrial world.
3. Do you think a teacher like Miss Lacy would do better, worse or about the same on formal or informal evaluations?
Miss Lacy seems to be a fine teacher and I think she would do well under any type of evaluation.
1. What are the advantages/advantages of informal vs. formal teacher evaluations.
Formal evaluations are expected performance reviews and IMO will work better than “informal” reviews. Informal implies a lower standard for judging to me.
2. Which do you think is better?
Formal. And we need to go well beyond just “reviews”. Teachers must have majored in subjects that they teach, or at least minored. Too many teachers are totally unqualified to teach in many subject areas esp. math and science. Add to that the teachers who cannot even pass the certification exams and you understand why we have one of the worst education systems in the industrial world.
3. Do you think a teacher like Miss Lacy would do better, worse or about the same on formal or informal evaluations?
Miss Lacy seems to be a fine teacher and I think she would do well under any type of evaluation.
1. What are the advantages/advantages of informal vs. formal teacher evaluations?
How so?
The informal evaluation used prior to about 1984 was not without structure. It measured the same things, minus what I consider the overemphasis on in-service training or professional development that the current system demands.
Under the old system, principals came in an out of classrooms at will. While walk-troughs are permitted under the newer system, the main grading of teachers is done on one formal observation. The problems here are many:
a. It’s quite easy for teachers to put on a “dog and pony show” that meets the demands of the evaluation system for one forty-five minute period.
b. Considering the training (administration, teacher organizations and even colleges provide) to teach teachers how do well on the evaluation takes up time and money where, in my opinion, both could be spent better. There is also considerable time and money spent training evaluators.
c. Look at the link for the evaluation instrument. The instrument and the training materials are another expense that could go for better things.
d. Although the system is more formal, a principal can still give someone he/she doesn’t like a hard time. This can lead to termination, being placed on a growth plan, etc. Then you have the counter arguments advanced by the teacher organizations. Sometimes terminating teachers or placing them on a growth plans is warranted. Sometimes it is not. As far as the “formal” vs. “informal” evaluations, there seems to be no difference. Evaluations were—done fairly in some instances unfairly, sometimes for internal political reasons—under the old system and the same thing happens under the new.
2. Which do you think is better?
I prefer the informal because it was less susceptible to “dog and pony shows,” and cost less in terms of manpower and paperwork. During the time frame for formal observations, much of the administrative staff of a school is tied up doing evaluations. This means other duties; including handling discipline and dealing with parents can be neglected.
I did well under both systems, but there was less stress involved in the old system. I know some people think otherwise, but I believe most people work better under less stressful conditions.
3. Do you think a teacher like Miss Lacy would do better, worse or about the same on formal or informal evaluations?
If the current “formal” evaluation were administered as evaluators are taught to administer the instrument, I don’t think Miss Lacy would do as well. I don’t know how much better she would do, but I doubt she would do as well.
As an aside, most special education teachers work with an instructional assistant. Evaluation of the assistant was the combined duty of the teacher and the principal. I really hated having to do this. Assistants are not subjected to the same instrument as teachers. At one time the form for the assistants had only three categories 1. satisfactory, 2. and 3. “needs improvement,” and “unsatisfactory.” I rated my assistant “satisfactory” across all categories. My principal called me in and asked me to change one of the categories to “needs improvement,” since as she put it “nobody is perfect.” My comeback was that “satisfactory” did not mean “perfect” and that if we had to rate an assistant lower than satisfactory in one category then we should add he designations “outstanding” and “exceeds expectations” so that we could rate them higher than “satisfactory” in some areas. She then said “this is the instrument we have.” I refused to change my rating of the assistant, the principal found one category to rate the assistant “needs improvement.” We went to the teacher union with a proposal to change to change the instrument by adding the two categories I had suggested. Personnel agreed and the following year’s evaluation added the designations “outstanding” and “exceeds expectations.”
This was one of my “Trumanesque” moments.
QUOTE(Ted)
Formal evaluations are expected performance reviews and IMO will work better than “informal” reviews. Informal implies a lower standard for judging to me.
How so?
The informal evaluation used prior to about 1984 was not without structure. It measured the same things, minus what I consider the overemphasis on in-service training or professional development that the current system demands.
Under the old system, principals came in an out of classrooms at will. While walk-troughs are permitted under the newer system, the main grading of teachers is done on one formal observation. The problems here are many:
a. It’s quite easy for teachers to put on a “dog and pony show” that meets the demands of the evaluation system for one forty-five minute period.
b. Considering the training (administration, teacher organizations and even colleges provide) to teach teachers how do well on the evaluation takes up time and money where, in my opinion, both could be spent better. There is also considerable time and money spent training evaluators.
c. Look at the link for the evaluation instrument. The instrument and the training materials are another expense that could go for better things.
d. Although the system is more formal, a principal can still give someone he/she doesn’t like a hard time. This can lead to termination, being placed on a growth plan, etc. Then you have the counter arguments advanced by the teacher organizations. Sometimes terminating teachers or placing them on a growth plans is warranted. Sometimes it is not. As far as the “formal” vs. “informal” evaluations, there seems to be no difference. Evaluations were—done fairly in some instances unfairly, sometimes for internal political reasons—under the old system and the same thing happens under the new.
2. Which do you think is better?
I prefer the informal because it was less susceptible to “dog and pony shows,” and cost less in terms of manpower and paperwork. During the time frame for formal observations, much of the administrative staff of a school is tied up doing evaluations. This means other duties; including handling discipline and dealing with parents can be neglected.
I did well under both systems, but there was less stress involved in the old system. I know some people think otherwise, but I believe most people work better under less stressful conditions.
3. Do you think a teacher like Miss Lacy would do better, worse or about the same on formal or informal evaluations?
If the current “formal” evaluation were administered as evaluators are taught to administer the instrument, I don’t think Miss Lacy would do as well. I don’t know how much better she would do, but I doubt she would do as well.
As an aside, most special education teachers work with an instructional assistant. Evaluation of the assistant was the combined duty of the teacher and the principal. I really hated having to do this. Assistants are not subjected to the same instrument as teachers. At one time the form for the assistants had only three categories 1. satisfactory, 2. and 3. “needs improvement,” and “unsatisfactory.” I rated my assistant “satisfactory” across all categories. My principal called me in and asked me to change one of the categories to “needs improvement,” since as she put it “nobody is perfect.” My comeback was that “satisfactory” did not mean “perfect” and that if we had to rate an assistant lower than satisfactory in one category then we should add he designations “outstanding” and “exceeds expectations” so that we could rate them higher than “satisfactory” in some areas. She then said “this is the instrument we have.” I refused to change my rating of the assistant, the principal found one category to rate the assistant “needs improvement.” We went to the teacher union with a proposal to change to change the instrument by adding the two categories I had suggested. Personnel agreed and the following year’s evaluation added the designations “outstanding” and “exceeds expectations.”
This was one of my “Trumanesque” moments.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.