Educator Evaluation Beacon

evaluation

More Effective Use of the Teacher Performance Rubric

by

In his article in Chalkbeat New York, Kim Marshall details eight PersonalConversationpitfalls in putting the teacher rubric at the center of classroom observations. He cites distraction from open-minded observation, creating a top-down dynamic, and replacing face-to-face observations with electronic communication.

Marshall offers these alternative approaches:

  • Use the rubric at three points in the evaluative cycle: for teacher self-assessment and for the mid-cycle and summative reviews.
  • Follow up every classroom observation with a brief face-to-face conversation.

 

Are DDMs a Potential Minefield?

by

minefieldJustin, a middle school math teacher, shared his concerns about DDMs with me this week. I asked why he is supporting his district’s purchase of an off-the-shelf product to measure student growth.

Me: Why not create a DDM to measure what you care about, like the math practice standards from the Common Core?
Justin: I worry about the consequences of creating a DDM without a high level of validity and reliability.
Me: If your students’ growth ends up being low due to a flawed measure, won’t you be able to explain that to your evaluator?
Justin: Yes, with my current evaluator– but what if that person goes elsewhere? How can I be sure that his replacement will be equally understanding and trustworthy? And, if I am given a low impact rating, might it become difficult to get a job in another district?

And therein lies the nature of the minefield. Yes, the results of a low impact rating are not huge– moving from a two-year self-directed educator plan to a one-year plan– but what hard-working, caring teacher wants to be unfairly tagged with a low rating? And the long range impact on a teacher’s ability to find a new job may be immense.

What’s to be done? In my next post I’ll propose some of the long range benefits to be gained from implementing DDMs.