How Best Do We Measure Teacher Effectiveness?

As I have been reading and researching articles for our applied theory paper, I have had conflicting thoughts and ideas of how to improve our teacher evaluation system. Sandoval (2015) reports that many school districts do not incorporate student growth as part of a formal teacher evaluation. In support of this idea, I think that it would be fair to use some type of student data as part of an overall teacher evaluation. This information could potentially improve our practice by identifying specific needs of our students and helping us collaborate with our colleagues about effective changes in instruction (Marshall, 2013). However, I think it is important for administrators to clearly articulate the true purpose of using student test scores as a form of evaluation to only improve teaching and learning. I become conflicted with this idea because I am afraid some districts would use these evaluations as a form of “incentivizing” student achievement or awarding merit pay to boost student achievement. I am completely against this idea of merit pay because I feel it can cause such a negative learning environment. By incentivizing our work as educators, I think it takes away the focus of the true needs of our students. I think it could also potentially widen the achievement gap between the different subgroups. Why would any teacher want to work in the traditionally lower scoring school when they will be highly criticized because of their students’ lack of growth? We have seen some huge challenges and arguments against awarding merit pay and incentivizing teachers to increase student growth. I think the most compelling argument is that using standardized tests as a measure does not accurately demonstrate student growth. It is only one test that would unfairly determine teacher effectiveness (Marshall, 2013). When we are looking at teacher evaluation and effectiveness, I think there needs to be a variety of factors that should be considered in addition to student academic growth gains. I agree with The New Teacher Project article that offered six design standards to consider in a teacher evaluation: Annual Process, Clear/Rigorous Expectations, Multiple Measures, Multiple Ratings, Regular Feedback, and Significance (Rating a Teacher Observation Tool, 2011). The key factors from these design standards that stand out to me are the use of multiple measures of performance and the impact on student growth. I think this design standard supports both Marshall (2013) and Sandoval (2015) belief that teacher evaluations should include student growth and achievement gains. However, it is important to understand that best practice employs multiple measures as opposed to basing effectiveness on just one standardized assessment. Another important aspect of using multiple measures is utilizing both “on the spot” and interim assessments results to evaluate teacher effectiveness (Marshall, 2013). On the spot assessments provide immediate feedback for teachers to check for understanding. Interim assessments help teachers identify if students are able to apply their learning and demonstrate mastery over a longer period of time, usually monthly or quarterly. I agree with Marshall (2013) that using both of these assessments can be a powerful tool to improve student growth and measure teacher effectiveness. Marshall, K. (2013). Rethinking teacher supervision and evaluation: how to work smart, build collaboration, and close the achievement gap. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. RATING A TEACHER OBSERVATION TOOL . (2011). The new teacher project. Retrieved March 13, 2017, fromhttp://www.bing.com/cr?IG=2E1C96BA77A740CA9400FBB6E447076E&CID=04400622C2A362BC13260C66C3926351&rd=1&h=YbVv6WxISaRImf5oFV9z0VipVTGT_IGneHTvggn0FUU&v=1&r=http%3a%2f%2ftntp.org%2fassets%2fdocuments%2fTNTP_RatingATeacherObservationTool_Feb2011.pdf&p=DevEx,5061.1