The discussion includes specific examples from two districts, namely, the Midwest School District and South Central Texas School District. The final section provides some recommendations that will help educators design a better evaluation system for the 21st century.
The incongruity of teacher evaluation is that it has the capability to significantly contribute to the growth and improvement of every teacher, but in reality it helps only a very few people. The capability of teacher evaluation is widely known. Almost all states mandate standard evaluation in compliance to the law and validate such mandates, partly, based on the obligation of teachers to improve. Most districts have collective bargaining contracts or rules specifying evaluation processes. In fact, numerous of the major educational reforms in the United States (e.g. career ranking, performance incentive/merit pay, etc.) are rooted in the belief that strong, effective evaluation processes can be formulated.
Even so, in truth, teacher evaluations performed in most schools are short, inconsistent, formal procedures requiring several instances of classroom inspection every year at least accompanied by the accomplishment of a compulsory evaluation document, which is approved by all involved entities and then stacked away to oblivion. When this takes place, state law provisions and requirements of the collective bargaining contract have been satisfied, but in reality nothing valuable is accomplished for the teachers, schools, students, or community (Marsh, 2009). This essay, on the first part, discusses the history, trends, and effectiveness of teacher evaluation in the United States. The second part discusses the similarities and differences between two distinct district teacher evaluation. And the third part spells out the features of an ‘ideal’ teacher evaluation in the 21st century.
Teacher evaluation originated from the evaluative role of the ...Show more