Mike Schmoker's article, "Why Complex Teacher Evaluations Don't Work" (Education Week, August 28, 2012) argues for the importance of clarity and support in teacher evaluation systems so that accountability can exist in a fair and productive way. Many evaluation systems are overly-complex containing a superfluous amount of components. For example, here in Massachusetts, the Rubric of Effective Teaching contains 32 elements. As a result, the Boston Public Schools have identified a subset of the elements in alignment with the district's academic priorities. This prioritization is in line with Schmoker's thinking:
Once clarified, evaluation would then focus on only one or two elements at a time, with multiple opportunities for teachers to practice and receive feedback from their evaluators. Teachers' progress and performance on these criteria would be the basis for evaluation.
The hope is that a reduction in the criteria on which evaluators judge employees' performance will allow for more clarity and focus in the feedback teachers receive, and the quality of that feedback. Additionally, it will allow for deeper focus and investment in the professional learning opportunities which might allow for improvement in these areas.
Once clarified, evaluation would then focus on only one or two elements at a time, with multiple opportunities for teachers to practice and receive feedback from their evaluators. Teachers' progress and performance on these criteria would be the basis for evaluation.
The hope is that a reduction in the criteria on which evaluators judge employees' performance will allow for more clarity and focus in the feedback teachers receive, and the quality of that feedback. Additionally, it will allow for deeper focus and investment in the professional learning opportunities which might allow for improvement in these areas.