PRINCIPALS SHOULD DO TEACHER EVALUATIONS
PRINCIPALS SHOULD DO TEACHER EVALUATIONS
By Domenick J. Maglio, Phd. Traditional Realist
There has been a great deal of discussion concerning how to
evaluate teachers to improve our educational system. The Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation and other educational groups are devising multi dimensional matrixes
to measure teacher performance. In each case criticism has arisen by teachers
who are evaluated by these instruments and felt they were not valid.
Evaluating teacher effectiveness has always been a
complicated task, as each different educational approach requires unique skills
and personalities to successfully do the job. This has become more difficult as
schools have expanded in size and number of students. Principals getting to
observe and know a teacher and her interactions with students, other teachers
and administration becomes almost impossible. There are increased administrative
responsibilities, school district and state mandated meetings.
Finland has a different educational approach. It has consistently
scored high on its PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) ranking
of international education. The educational system of this country has made
significant reforms by rejecting large schools and teacher evaluation-student
performance driven centralized models of most of the advanced nations. In
Finland the teacher evaluates the student’s learning through observation and
evaluative tests. Mandatory standardized exams are not given until a student is
16 years old. Experienced teachers mentor new staff through sharing their
observations and debriefing them about their teaching practices. In Singapore
and South Korea they also have teacher mentoring for 15-25 hours weekly. The
focus is to help new teachers be more effective. The local principal in Finland
is the evaluator of the teaching staff as it should be in America.
These straight-forward and accountable practices are some reasons
why the schools are on top of the international school rankings. They decided
to continue to use the principal as the evaluator of his staff although the US
is moving toward a more complex teacher evaluation process correlated to
student performance.
The use of student progress in the multi-dimensional
teacher evaluation model, no matter how integrated, is as effective as the
evaluators accurate scoring of the teacher. The easiest method of completing
any teacher evaluation is to rate high to minimize the teacher’s resentment.
In the USA with much input from others, less than 1% of
all the teachers have received an unsatisfactory grade under its present
comprehensive teacher evaluation. This may be partially the result of our
politically correct culture although the fear of union retaliation probably is
the greatest contributor to this shirking of administrative power and accountability.
A major drawback to US education has been the unmanageable
growth in the size of the schools. Large schools are more cost effective per
student but not for student performance. “One of the most effective ways to
improve student achievement and curb school violence is to reduce the size of
the nation’s schools. Hundreds of studies have found that students who attend
small schools outperform those in large school on every academic measure from
grades to test scores. They are less likely to drop out and more likely to
attend college.” “Small Schools Vs. Big Schools,” Institute for Local
Self-Reliance, May 19, 2012. Yet our schools continue to bloat.
Quality of educational supervision is negatively impacted
by staff size regardless of the number of assistant administrators or staff
supervisors. Second hand information filtered by the assistants is less meaningful
and accurate to the principal than direct interaction and observation by him in
completing a teacher evaluation.
A principal has to build a close-knit team to execute his
philosophy of education in order to get quality results. He has to observe his
staff with students, colleagues, parents and administration to know their
strengths and weaknesses with different elements and settings within the school
community. His personal knowledge of his teachers gives him the insights to
realize who would complement each other to provide a balanced and enthusiastic
school social climate.
This firsthand knowledge of his teacher’s performance with
each segment of the community will enable him to differentiate compensation or
require removal. Student’s improvement performance is a strong indicator
although teacher growth in communicating, planning, organizing, disciplining,
motivating and following through are also strong factors in the evaluation
equation.
The principal has to take into account the needs of the
school as well as the teacher. The teacher may have personal issues that are
affecting her overall performance that would have to be weighed against many
other school factors. The scorer has to
have a vested interested for the sake of the functioning of the whole school
program and be as honest and straightforward as he can be. The head of the
school has to consider the cost and benefits to the entire operation of the
school.
A principal with relevant knowledge of a teacher’s
behavior in a variety of settings can accurately and comprehensively evaluate a
person’s ability to do the job the principal has envisioned for the school. This
teacher evaluation approach is feasible in manageable smaller schools.
Domenick Maglio, PhD. is a columnist carried by various
newspapers, an author of several books and owner/director of Wider Horizons
School, a college prep program. You can visit Dr. Maglio at www.drmaglio.blogspot.com.