Educator effectiveness

Last updated

Educator effectiveness is a United States K-12 school system education policy initiative that measures the quality of an educator performance in terms of improving student learning. It describes a variety of methods, such as observations, student assessments, student work samples and examples of teacher work, that education leaders use to determine the effectiveness of a K-12 educator.

Contents

The drive for educator effectiveness programs stem from the Race to the Top program, where states were awarded points for meeting educational policies based on the teacher's effectiveness. This policy was the basis of the emergence of statewide educator effectiveness programs.

Educator effectiveness programs vary from state to state. Typically, an educator effectiveness program describes a cycle of observations and assessments that apply to different groups of teachers during an academic year. New teachers are evaluated more frequently, and veteran teachers are evaluated across multiple year cycles. Evaluated teachers have multiple scheduled classroom observations and conferences with the evaluator in addition to unannounced classroom observations. A controversial aspect of The purpose of evaluations is to help educators determine what is effective in their practices and provides them a medium to reflect upon and change their practice to help teachers become more effective.

Definition

Educator effectiveness is a method used in the K-12 school system that uses multiple measures of assessments including classroom observations, student work samples, assessment scores and teacher artifacts, to determine the impact a particular teacher has on student's learning outcomes. While schools have used teacher evaluation practices and policies for many years, the emergence of educator effectiveness policies combines these existing practices with rubrics and test scores to provide more robust perspectives on the work of teachers. Educator effectiveness initiatives often use descriptions of effective teaching practices, such as Charlotte Danielson's "Framework for Teaching", to organize teaching separate domains for assessment. Danielson's domains include: Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Professional Responsibilities, and Instruction.

Purpose

Teacher evaluations have changed over time and have had different standards across the United States. Evaluation systems often have been comprised an administrator observing a teacher a couple times per year. In some locations, teacher observations were only done on a three-year or longer cycle. In the past, a Widget Effect, as described by The New Teacher Project has been established that has developed a culture where all teachers feel as though they deserve the highest marks on evaluations. Schools used to see their job as filling positions and thought that any teacher who was given a license was high quality, and thus scored them according to that thought process. Therefore, all teachers were getting scores that were good or great and no variation was able to be determined between any two teachers.

Today, federal and state policies have encouraged school systems to design more comprehensive evaluation systems that rely on multiple measures of how a teacher performs by looking at items such as student performance gains, classroom observations, teacher reflections, content specific knowledge and student reflections. Some policy makers and researchers encourage the design of systems to identify and sort good and bad teachers; others are designed to provide meaningful feedback and professional development to teachers in order to enhance their skills.

Overall, the purpose of educator effectiveness is to build the capacity for teachers to enhance their skills. The effective teachers have an effect on student's ability to have a higher level of conceptual understanding of a topic and have displayed the ability to think more abstractly than peers taught by less effective teachers. Quality teaching also has been identified as a key influence for positive learning outcomes for the diverse body of students in the classroom.

How it is being used

As of 2013, US schools United States had very little cohesiveness in their teacher effectiveness requirements and implementations. In 2013, 25 states required that student achievement is a big or the biggest part of teacher evaluations. Twenty-seven states required teacher evaluations be based on a variety of student assessments and work samples and 44 states required classroom observations to be put into teacher evaluations. Overall, 11 states require a statewide teacher evaluation system; 10 states gave a statewide evaluation model that districts can either do or decide to do a similar model. To date only a small handful of states have adopted policies connecting the performance of students to their teachers and the colleges where the teachers were trained. [1]

Many countries have national policies that decide what teacher evaluation systems that schools will have to follow. Some countries such as Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden provide annual feedback on teaching practices. Other countries, such as Norway and Iceland, leave the decision about how the teacher evaluations systems will be done to be determined at a local level. The quality of teaching in these countries is compared to the curriculum they follow and with the school instructional plan. Finland does not use any standardized testing as a measure of teacher effectiveness. Singapore is another country that does not use test scores but rather focuses on how teachers work together as a main part of their evaluation system. Singapore also focuses heavily on professional development around evaluation, coaching, mentoring and collaborating with other educators with an overall goal of getting a high-quality teaching staff. [2]

There is significant debate in the U.S. about how to reward teachers for performance as measured by educator effectiveness policies. Some schools rewards teachers by paying them more based upon their student's test scores, which is linked to the Race to the Top funding in the United States. [3] However, other reward systems are being created based on the idea that improving a teacher's capacity to learn and improve upon their practice will have a direct impact on student achievement. These schools increase pay for teachers who have a National Board Certification using National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, advanced degrees, engaging in professional development, mentor new colleagues and paying more for these qualified teachers in hard to staff schools [4]

The connection of teacher effectiveness and merit pay varies in different countries. In Finland and Canada, they do not to use merit-pay approaches but encourage conversations between the evaluator and teacher about student progress and success. In contrast, Chinese and Singaporean teachers, get financial bonuses and promotions for high performance. High-performing countries have a strong system of professional and school-level accountability but look at success on things such as school improvement goals, professional contributions, and indicators of student well-being. [5]

Methods of evaluating teachers

Most educator effectiveness programs rely two kinds of data: observations of teaching practices and student outcomes data. There are four main sources of observational data collected by schools:

  1. Classroom observations happen when someone comes into a teacher's classroom to observe their teaching practice, typically done by a school administrator. The methods of commenting on teaching practice within classroom observations varies from district created to purchased evaluation forms. [6]
  2. Some schools use Self-Evaluation as a reflective tool for teachers to look at their current practice and change what they are doing to have a greater educational impact on students. Teachers often use a variety of tools to reflect and change their practice including self-monitoring, recording their own practice, and student's feedback through survey's and questionnaires. [7]
  3. Teacher Portfolios are used to compile a variety of evidence of teacher practices for the purpose of showing development of teaching over time. It is often used in conjunction with self-reflection or peer-reviewing of teaching practices. [8]
  4. Peer-Review of Teaching is a method for teaching to discuss their practice with another teacher or group of teachers that gives feedback about teaching and learning. Often an evaluation of the teaching materials is done with the purpose of providing feedback to change teaching practices. [9]

The new part of educator effectiveness policies is the integration of outcome data into the evaluation process. The biggest component of the outcome data is growth of student learning as measured by standardized tests. Most educator effectiveness programs rely on some form of value-added measures to determine student growth. Value-added measure use longitudinal measures of student achievement to estimate the growth in student learning that can be attributed to individual teachers. If the students of a specific teacher demonstrate growth in learning better than predicated on standardized tests, the teacher is said to be effective; if the students score below the predicted scores, the teacher is said to be ineffective. [10] Parent and student surveys are another method of collecting data on teachers and their educational practices. [11]

Criticisms

Many argue that it is difficult to measure the effect that teachers have on student learning. Many teachers who are in the K-12 system, teach subjects that are not assessed on state mandated testing. In order to effectively implement an educator effectiveness system, some argue that states need to create different evaluation systems for the teachers who teach students in non-tested areas such as submitted portfolios of student work, lesson logs, video clips of them teaching and reflective commentaries on lessons. [12]

Others argue about the methodology as some districts are using value added models to determine the effectiveness to teachers. They state that it is an unreliable measurement tool because the makeup of classes differ greatly from teacher to teacher and from year to year. Some say that it ends up penalizing teachers who traditionally do not score well on standardized assessments such as students who receive free and reduce lunch and students with disabilities. They state that this may cause the highly effective teachers to work at schools with a low disability rate and a middle to high socioeconomic status. [13] There are different ways to calculate the value-added effect of teachers that changes depending on how they define value-added and what they use to calculate it. It typically does not account for the expectations put on students who go into a classroom reading below grade level and are expected to have a much higher growth rate than their peers. Through many research studies, it has shown that the estimates of teacher effectiveness were not through the same throughout different years or content areas such as reading and math and may be difficult to compare gains from tests from year to year when they don't measure the same content [14]

Some have commented that evaluators in states with teacher evaluation systems do not have through enough training. Furthermore, these evaluators often do not have to prove themselves as effective teachers themselves. As of 2013, only 13 states require a certification for their evaluators that require evaluators are effective teachers. Furthermore, often the same evaluator is observing students every time. In order to have high quality teacher feedback, some would argue that multiple perspectives by highly effective educators would create the dialogue and feedback that would help teachers to grow. [15]

See also

Related Research Articles

Educational assessment or educational evaluation is the systematic process of documenting and using empirical data on the knowledge, skill, attitudes, aptitude and beliefs to refine programs and improve student learning. Assessment data can be obtained from directly examining student work to assess the achievement of learning outcomes or can be based on data from which one can make inferences about learning. Assessment is often used interchangeably with test, but not limited to tests. Assessment can focus on the individual learner, the learning community, a course, an academic program, the institution, or the educational system as a whole. The word 'assessment' came into use in an educational context after the Second World War.

The Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) is a Crown agency of the Government of Ontario in Canada. It was legislated into creation in 1996 in response to recommendations made by the Royal Commission on Learning in February 1995.

Educational evaluation is the evaluation process of characterizing and appraising some aspect/s of an educational process.

Mastery learning is an instructional strategy and educational philosophy, first formally proposed by Benjamin Bloom in 1968. Mastery learning maintains that students must achieve a level of mastery in prerequisite knowledge before moving forward to learn subsequent information. If a student does not achieve mastery on the test, they are given additional support in learning and reviewing the information and then tested again. This cycle continues until the learner accomplishes mastery, and they may then move on to the next stage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Teacher education</span> Training teachers to develop teaching skills

Teacher education or teacher training refers to programs, policies, procedures, and provision designed to equip (prospective) teachers with the knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, approaches, methodologies and skills they require to perform their tasks effectively in the classroom, school, and wider community. The professionals who engage in training the prospective teachers are called teacher educators.

A course evaluation is a paper or electronic questionnaire, which requires a written or selected response answer to a series of questions in order to evaluate the instruction of a given course. The term may also refer to the completed survey form or a summary of responses to questionnaires.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Summative assessment</span> Assessment used to determine student outcomes after an academic course

Summative assessment, summative evaluation, or assessment of learning is the assessment of participants in an educational program. Summative assessments are designed to both assess the effectiveness of the program and the learning of the participants. This contrasts with formative assessment, which summarizes the participants' development at a particular time in order to inform instructors of student learning progress.

Formative assessment, formative evaluation, formative feedback, or assessment for learning, including diagnostic testing, is a range of formal and informal assessment procedures conducted by teachers during the learning process in order to modify teaching and learning activities to improve student attainment. The goal of a formative assessment is to monitor student learning to provide ongoing feedback that can help students identify their strengths and weaknesses and target areas that need work. It also helps faculty recognize where students are struggling and address problems immediately. It typically involves qualitative feedback for both student and teacher that focuses on the details of content and performance. It is commonly contrasted with summative assessment, which seeks to monitor educational outcomes, often for purposes of external accountability.

Thomas Joseph Kane is an American education economist who currently holds the position of Walter H. Gale Professor of Education and Economics at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. He has performed research on education policy, labour economics and econometrics. During Bill Clinton's first term as U.S. President, Kane served on the Council of Economic Advisers.

Classroom walkthrough is a model of professional development for teachers. Clinical supervision, or the practice of classroom observation and feedback has been one of the most often used tool in evaluating teacher performance, however the extent to which it helps teachers to improve their instruction is questionable. As a result, the classroom walkthrough, not designed for evaluation, but for the purpose of professional development, has gained increasing popularity.

Peer assessment, or self-assessment, is a process whereby students or their peers grade assignments or tests based on a teacher’s benchmarks. The practice is employed to save teachers time and improve students' understanding of course materials as well as improve their metacognitive skills. Rubrics are often used in conjunction with Self- and Peer-Assessment.

Peer feedback is a practice where feedback is given by one student to another. Peer feedback provides students opportunities to learn from each other. After students finish a writing assignment but before the assignment is handed in to the instructor for a grade, the students have to work together to check each other's work and give comments to the peer partner. Comments from peers are called as peer feedback. Peer feedback can be in the form of corrections, opinions, suggestions, or ideas to each other. Ideally, peer feedback is a two-way process in which one cooperates with the other.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evidence-based education</span> Use of empirical evidence to make policy and practice decisions in education

Evidence-based education (EBE) is the principle that education practices should be based on the best available scientific evidence, rather than tradition, personal judgement, or other influences. Evidence-based education is related to evidence-based teaching, evidence-based learning, and school effectiveness research. For example, research has shown that spaced repetition "leads to more robust memory formation than does massed training, which involves short or no intervals".

Value-added modeling is a method of teacher evaluation that measures the teacher's contribution in a given year by comparing the current test scores of their students to the scores of those same students in previous school years, as well as to the scores of other students in the same grade. In this manner, value-added modeling seeks to isolate the contribution, or value added, that each teacher provides in a given year, which can be compared to the performance measures of other teachers. VAMs are considered to be fairer than simply comparing student achievement scores or gain scores without considering potentially confounding context variables like past performance or income. It is also possible to use this approach to estimate the value added by the school principal or the school as a whole.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Differentiated instruction</span> Framework or philosophy for effective teaching

Differentiated instruction and assessment, also known as differentiated learning or, in education, simply, differentiation, is a framework or philosophy for effective teaching that involves providing all students within their diverse classroom community of learners a range of different avenues for understanding new information in terms of: acquiring content; processing, constructing, or making sense of ideas; and developing teaching materials and assessment measures so that all students within a classroom can learn effectively, regardless of differences in their ability. Differentiated instruction, according to Carol Ann Tomlinson, is the process of "ensuring that what a student learns, how he or she learns it, and how the student demonstrates what he or she has learned is a match for that student's readiness level, interests, and preferred mode of learning." According to Boelens et al. (2018), differentiation can be on two different levels: the administration level and the classroom level. The administration level takes the socioeconomic status and gender of students into consideration. At the classroom level, differentiation revolves around content, processing, product, and effects. On the content level, teachers adapt what they are teaching to meet the needs of students. This can mean making content more challenging or simplified for students based on their levels. The process of learning can be differentiated as well. Teachers may choose to teach individually at a time, assign problems to small groups, partners or the whole group depending on the needs of the students. By differentiating product, teachers decide how students will present what they have learned. This may take the form of videos, graphic organizers, photo presentations, writing, and oral presentations. All these take place in a safe classroom environment where students feel respected and valued—effects.

Last in First Out is a policy often used by school districts and other employers to prioritize layoffs by seniority. Under LIFO layoff rules, junior teachers and other employees lose their jobs before senior ones. Laying off junior employees first is not exclusive to the education sector or to the United States, but is perhaps most controversial there. LIFO's proponents claim that it protects teachers with tenure and gives them job stability, and that it is an easily administered way of accomplishing layoffs following a budget cut. LIFO's critics respond that it is bad for students. They prefer that the best teachers remain regardless of how long they have been teaching.

Teacher quality assessment commonly includes reviews of qualifications, tests of teacher knowledge, observations of practice, and measurements of student learning gains. Assessments of teacher quality are currently used for policymaking, employment and tenure decisions, teacher evaluations, merit pay awards, and as data to inform the professional growth of teachers.

Robert J. Marzano is an educational researcher in the United States. He has done educational research and theory on the topics of standards-based assessment, cognition, high-yield teaching strategies, and school leadership, including the development of practical programs and tools for teachers and administrators in K-12 schools.

Data based decision making or data driven decision making refers to educator’s ongoing process of collecting and analyzing different types of data, including demographic, student achievement test, satisfaction, process data to guide decisions towards improvement of educational process. DDDM becomes more important in education since federal and state test-based accountability policies. No Child Left Behind Act opens broader opportunities and incentives in using data by educational organizations by requiring schools and districts to analyze additional components of data, as well as pressing them to increase student test scores. Information makes schools accountable for year by year improvement various student groups. DDDM helps to recognize the problem and who is affected by the problem.

Data-driven instruction is an educational approach that relies on information to inform teaching and learning. The idea refers to a method teachers use to improve instruction by looking at the information they have about their students. It takes place within the classroom, compared to data-driven decision making. Data-driven instruction works on two levels. One, it provides teachers the ability to be more responsive to students’ needs, and two, it allows students to be in charge of their own learning. Data-driven instruction can be understood through examination of its history, how it is used in the classroom, its attributes, and examples from teachers using this process.

References

  1. ↑ Doherty, K.M & Jacobs, S. (2013). State of the States 2013: Connect the Dots – Using evaluations of teacher effectiveness to inform policy and practice. Washington, D.C. The National Council on Teacher Quality.
  2. ↑ Walker, T. (2013, March 25). How Do High-Performing Nations Evaluate Teachers? - NEA Today. Retrieved April 22, 2015, from http://neatoday.org/2013/03/25/how-do-high-performing-nations-evaluate-teachers/
  3. ↑ Rosales, J. (2004). Pay based on test scores? What educators need to know about linking teacher pay to student achievement. National Education Association.
  4. ↑ Flannery, M.E. & Jehlen, A. (2008). Where is your pay plan heading? National Education Foundation
  5. ↑ Stewart, V. (2010). Raising Teacher Quality Around the World. Educational Leadership, 68(4), 16-20.
  6. ↑ Goe, L. & Croft, A. (2008). Methods of Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness. Research-to-Practice Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
  7. ↑ Schwartz, M. (2015). Self-Evaluation of Teaching. Ryerson University: The Learning and Teaching Office.
  8. ↑ Center for Teaching. (2015) Teaching Portfolios from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/teaching-portfolios/
  9. ↑ Center for Teaching and Learning (2015). Peer Review of Teaching. University of Minnesota from http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/teachlearn/resources/peer/
  10. ↑ Goe, L. & Croft, A. (2008). Methods of Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness. Research-to-Practice Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
  11. ↑ Teaching and Learning Center (2015). General Education Improvement. University of the Science from http://www.usciences.edu/teaching/tips/improvement.shtml
  12. ↑ Darling-Hammond. (2012). Creating a comprehensive system for evaluating and supporting effective teaching. Stanford, CA. Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
  13. ↑ Darling-Hammond. (2012). Creating a comprehensive system for evaluating and supporting effective teaching. Stanford, CA. Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
  14. ↑ David, J.L ( 2010). What research says about using value-added measures to evaluate teachers. Educational Leadership (67)8
  15. ↑ Doherty, K.M & Jacobs, S. (2013). State of the States 2013: Connect the Dots – Using evaluations of teacher effectiveness to inform policy and practice. Washington, D.C. The National Council on Teacher Quality.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.