added scores to reduce “noise”
in the data (Goldhaber &
Hansen, 2008). Three years is
an unacceptable time lag for
intervening with ineffective
teachers.
n Fear of negative conse-
quences may lead teachers to
spend an inordinate amount
of time on test prep—and
may even increase cheating by
ethically challenged teachers
and administrators.
n Evaluating individual
teachers on the basis of test
results can have a negative
impact on collegiality and
teamwork, which are among
the most powerful engines of
instructional improvement.
n Usable standardized test
data are available for only
Student Input
n Districts will need to
collect three years of value-
The MET project makes a con-
vincing case for using student
surveys as a third factor in
teacher evaluation. Despite
many educators’ immediate
objection (How can children
evaluate adults?), there’s no
denying that students are with
their teachers hundreds more
hours than even the most ener-
getic administrator.
Harvard professor Ronald
Ferguson and his Tripod
Project colleagues have found
that students are quite astute
at sizing up teachers’ instructional competence when they
are asked about observable
PHOTO BY KEVIN DAVIS
classroom behaviors in kid-friendly language. Here are
some sample questions, using a
five-point agree/disagree scale:
n Our class stays busy and
about 20 percent of teachers,
students to Fountas-Pinnell Level M
does not waste time.
raising equity concerns about how the
or above by June); teach, assess, and
n I understand what I am supposed to
other 80 percent are evaluated.
share ideas throughout the year; assess
be learning in this class.
n Praising or criticizing individual
all students at the end of the year; and
n If I don’t understand something, my
teachers for their students’ test scores
present the results to the principal. The teacher explains it another way.
fails to take into account the work done principal could look at the data, give the
n My teacher pushes everyone to
by pullout teachers, specialists, tutors,
team a collective evaluation on its value- work hard.
and teachers in previous grades, all of
added data, and include the team score
n My teacher takes the time to sum-whom contribute to student outcomes.
as one factor in each teacher’s individual marize what we learn each day.
The conclusion is inescapable: It’s
evaluation.
Ferguson reports that students taught
highly problematic to use standardized
This approach puts student learning
by teachers with high student ratings
test scores to evaluate teachers. The idea at the heart of the evaluation process.
achieve a full semester better than stu-
sounds appealing, but it will inevitably
Formative assessment data can be used
dents whose teachers get low ratings
hit a brick wall.
throughout the year, and the premium
(Sparks, 2012).
Fortunately, there is a better way to
is on teamwork, with underperforming
But here’s a concern: Students
make student learning part of teacher
team members getting help and moti-
sometimes don’t appreciate tough,
evaluation. Each teacher team could
decide on a valid, locally available
assessment tool and get the principal’s
approval. (For example, a 2nd grade
vation from their colleagues. Admin-
istrators and other support personnel
can provide feedback, suggestions,
and support through frequent visits to
demanding teachers until years later.
Could high-stakes student surveys lead
teachers to lower their standards? In
addition, there’s evidence that although
team might pick Fountas-Pinnell bench- classrooms and team meetings. And all
high student ratings correlate with high
marks to assess reading.) The team
teachers—including primary grades,
achievement in the year surveyed, they
would do a baseline assessment of every art, music, and physical education—can correlate less well with success in the
student in September; set a goal (for
example, getting at least 85 percent of
be part of using teamwork and data to
continually improve their craft.
next grade or course (Glenn, 2011).
Fortunately, there’s a way to use
