Rethinking Evaluations When Almost Every Teacher Gets an ‘A’

[DEDixon 39]

http://www.baycitizen.org/education/story/rethinking-evaluations-when-almost-every/

Bay Area teachers get so many favorable reviews that it's impossible to tell how they are performing, some educators say

For the 2009-10 school year, just 40 out of 1,924 teachers — or 2 percent — reviewed by the San Francisco Unified School District received below-satisfactory performance reviews, district records show. Those figures are consistent with recent years: an average of 2.7 percent of teachers evaluated over the past five years received marks of “unsatisfactory” or “needs improvement,” records show.

A similar pattern has emerged in nearby school districts. In the San Jose and Oakland Unified School Districts, for example, about 1 percent of teachers received ratings of “ineffective” or “unsatisfactory,” records for 2009-10 show.

The numbers reveal that the review process is effectively broken, parents and administrators said, at a time when the Obama administration is seeking to tie federal money for education to the use of teacher evaluations based on student performance. That policy is controversial, particularly among teachers, who say that a variety of factors — some beyond their control — should be taken into account.

No “tenured” teachers in San Francisco have been fired in the last three years. (there is about 2000 tenured teachers in SF)

Leaders of the San Francisco teachers’ union say their evaluation system should be left alone.

***************

i cut a lot out of the article, but just wondering, imagine a company of 2000 employees, what are the chances that no one would be fired over a 3 year period?

do you think that just 1 percent of your colleagues receive ratings of “ineffective” or “unsatisfactory” on their annual review?

[J and S 38]

As a teacher, I agree that evaluating teachers based off of student performance is unfair and wrong. There are far too many factors and every school is different. Each classroom, each school, each district faces different challenges.

The post is somewhat misleading. They said no tenured teachers are fired. That means anyone with less than 3-5 years of experience may have been(and probably was) fired. You also don't give us a ratio of how many tenured to those that aren't.

However, I also agree that teachers need to be better evaluated. Again, ever district is different. At the previous school I worked at...I saw 3 teachers fired in 2 years which is far higher than 1%. But it's also a very real frustration to see younger and newer teachers being let go while older teachers who do not adjust their teaching to their students keep their job. But grading a teacher based off student performance presents too many problems, especially when you take into consideration working in an inner city school or even an inner city bilingual school. How do you make an evaluation that is fair on all grounds when you compare it to teachers who get to work in richer neighborhoods?

It's up to the school. The school I work out is extremely rigorous on students and teachers. I get random classroom visits from administrators to see what we do in class. Tests scores are looked at an compared with all teachers. But administrators know well enough you cant grade a teacher based on the kids.

Just my two cents as someone in the field. Yes evaluation needs to happen. yes teachers agree. Yes they need to let go of bad teachers. But they are going about it the wrong way.

[B_J 2,752]

As a teacher, I agree that evaluating teachers based off of student performance is unfair and wrong. There are far too many factors and every school is different. Each classroom, each school, each district faces different challenges.

The post is somewhat misleading. They said no tenured teachers are fired. That means anyone with less than 3-5 years of experience may have been(and probably was) fired. You also don't give us a ratio of how many tenured to those that aren't.

However, I also agree that teachers need to be better evaluated. Again, ever district is different. At the previous school I worked at...I saw 3 teachers fired in 2 years which is far higher than 1%. But it's also a very real frustration to see younger and newer teachers being let go while older teachers who do not adjust their teaching to their students keep their job. But grading a teacher based off student performance presents too many problems, especially when you take into consideration working in an inner city school or even an inner city bilingual school. How do you make an evaluation that is fair on all grounds when you compare it to teachers who get to work in richer neighborhoods?

It's up to the school. The school I work out is extremely rigorous on students and teachers. I get random classroom visits from administrators to see what we do in class. Tests scores are looked at an compared with all teachers. But administrators know well enough you cant grade a teacher based on the kids.

Just my two cents as someone in the field. Yes evaluation needs to happen. yes teachers agree. Yes they need to let go of bad teachers. But they are going about it the wrong way.

[Azzudiin 26]

Tenure is the entire education problem.

Take any other company or industry and grant tenure to employees and the business will shortly fail. Tell someone that you cannot be fired, their job performance will go right down the crapper.

A tenured teacher can call out sick whenever they feel, they don't need to hand out homework, because that would require work for them to grade. Get a tenured teacher to put in extra time to help a weak student, will not happen.

Union + tenure = poor education for students

[TigerTeddyBear 26]

Bad parents=bad students. Everything else is politics.

[J and S 38]

Tenure is the entire education problem.

Take any other company or industry and grant tenure to employees and the business will shortly fail. Tell someone that you cannot be fired, their job performance will go right down the crapper.

A tenured teacher can call out sick whenever they feel, they don't need to hand out homework, because that would require work for them to grade. Get a tenured teacher to put in extra time to help a weak student, will not happen.

Union + tenure = poor education for students

What myths are you listening to? A tenured teacher cannot get fired? Not true. I've seen it happen. Teachers can call in sick whenever they want to? Not true. Call in sick, on the 3rd consecutive day you have to turn in a doctor's note or it comes out your paycheck. Teachers don't have to turn in homework? Not true. Tell that to all of us who go to meetings every week, turn in evaluation sheets, get evaluated every year (in some districts every other year...even AFTER being tenured). Not to mention all the evidence I have to turn in that I'm doing my job.

...

...

Teaching is not the cookie cutter job everyone seems to think it is.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Bad parents=bad students. Everything else is politics.

In California, teaching is politics.

[DEDixon 39]

how about student ratings especially at the HS level? i know some students would not be honest, but they could easily be identified because they will likely rate all their teachers in a dishonest way. So feed the results into a computer with the right algorithm would probably produce some pretty interesting results. at any rate, this would be a good research proposal for a masters or PhD thesis work.

at the end of every class i had in college, at the end of it, we completed a survey. it could be tried elsewhere.

i know that when i was in HS, i knew which teachers cared and which did not care.

anything to root out teachers that say read chapter 3 and then do the worksheet while the teacher reads the newspaper would help.

[DEDixon 39]

The post is somewhat misleading. They said no tenured teachers are fired. That means anyone with less than 3-5 years of experience may have been(and probably was) fired. You also don't give us a ratio of how many tenured to those that aren't.

in CA it only takes 2 years to get tenure. they do fire teachers that aren't tenured, but that isn't even the problem. the problem is that teachers with tenured can do or not do just about anything and still keep their job.

[J and S 38]

in CA it only takes 2 years to get tenure. they do fire teachers that aren't tenured, but that isn't even the problem. the problem is that teachers with tenured can do or not do just about anything and still keep their job.

You mean in whichever district that you know it only takes two years. I live in CA, work in a CA school district. It takes three years PLUS the work you have to do to go from having a Preliminary Credential versus a Clear Credential. Then it doesn't stop there as you still get evaluated every year.

Teachers who are tenured can do just about anything and still keep their jobs.

Ok. Clearly people want to keep believing this myth. Spend more than 5 years in a district working as a teacher. And tell me if you would believe the same.

Like I said. Yeah. There are teachers that need to be let go. But it's not pony ride for a "tenured" teacher.

[luckytxn 2,263]

No matter what criteria is used then there will be ways to make sure that an across the board top ranked is achieved.

[DEDixon 39]

You mean in whichever district that you know it only takes two years. I live in CA, work in a CA school district. It takes three years PLUS the work you have to do to go from having a Preliminary Credential versus a Clear Credential. Then it doesn't stop there as you still get evaluated every year.

Teachers who are tenured can do just about anything and still keep their jobs.

Ok. Clearly people want to keep believing this myth. Spend more than 5 years in a district working as a teacher. And tell me if you would believe the same.

Like I said. Yeah. There are teachers that need to be let go. But it's not pony ride for a "tenured" teacher.

of the 1,924 teachers in SF, none were fired over a 3 year period. like i said in my OP, what company in the world exists where not a single employee was fired for 3 straight years? teachers must really be especially perfect, not 1 was fired in 3 years. you can call it a myth... i will call not a single firing among 1,924 teachers a miracle.

from the OP:

For the 2009-10 school year, just 40 out of 1,924 teachers — or 2 percent — reviewed by the San Francisco Unified School District received below-satisfactory performance reviews

California’s education code, contractual obligations and the threat of expensive legal battles can sometimes prevent veteran teachers from being fired. No “tenured” teachers in San Francisco, those on the payroll for two years or more, have been fired in the last three years.

[J and S 38]

of the 1,924 teachers in SF, none were fired over a 3 year period. like i said in my OP, what company in the world exists where not a single employee was fired for 3 straight years? teachers must really be especially perfect, not 1 was fired in 3 years. you can call it a myth... i will call not a single firing among 1,924 teachers a miracle.

from the OP:

One district now translates to all of the teaching profession.

1. California's Ed Code is known to be messed up compared to other states.

2. The Bay Area public schools are also ranked among some of the lower districts (for the exception of some richer counties). It's the primary reason I didn't move back to teach there...knowing their districts aren't that great.

...

How sad. Generalizing from one district to stereotype a whole profession. A job which most people like to point fingers at but wouldn't dare try spending one year doing it themselves in the hardest of conditions.

[Danno 1,228]

What myths are you listening to? A tenured teacher cannot get fired? Not true. I've seen it happen. Teachers can call in sick whenever they want to? Not true. Call in sick, on the 3rd consecutive day you have to turn in a doctor's note or it comes out your paycheck. Teachers don't have to turn in homework? Not true. Tell that to all of us who go to meetings every week, turn in evaluation sheets, get evaluated every year (in some districts every other year...even AFTER being tenured). Not to mention all the evidence I have to turn in that I'm doing my job.

...

...

Teaching is not the cookie cutter job everyone seems to think it is.

Thanks for the important work you do.

In your opinion, why is tenure even needed within the teaching field..... and do you agree it often covers or shields some second class teachers?

Edited January 28, 2011 by Danno

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No “tenured” teachers in San Francisco have been fired in the last three years. (there is about 2000 tenured teachers in SF)

I don't even understand why this is an issue. IMO, it doesn't take a lot to be an effective teacher, and there are plenty of effective teachers who have the charisma of a doorknob. When students think back of their best teachers, they think of the teachers who were charismatic, which is something you can't really train a teacher to be.