In our contract, we have two processes for evaluations, Process A for non-tenured/probationary teachers & Process B for tenured teachers. Process A is done for the first two years whereas Process B is done every other year. Most teachers when they have earned tenure fall under Process B, however, if a tenured teachers receives an unsatisfactory evaluation, they can be moved to Process A.
Under Process A, teachers have more objectives in which to be evaluated under and their admins are required to do more observations. They can also be assigned to work with a mentor teacher. This mentor teacher is required to also observe their colleague, in the hopes that these observations will move the veteran teacher back onto the Process B track. However, if they fail to make progress, they can also be on the track to losing their jobs. Evaluations are purely subjective and for that reason alone can be used for nefarious purposes.
Let me say right now that I do believe that some tenured teachers should be moved back onto Process A, if it will help with them become better teachers. I also believe that some people do not belong anywhere in a classroom. All that being said, some admins have been known to abuse this process in the hopes of getting rid of teachers they just do not like.
Such was the case of one of the teachers I'm helping right now. His administrator has a clear case of just not liking him and so he has done everything in his power for the past year to make this man's life miserable. He wanted to move this teacher from Process B to Process A and have him work with a mentor teacher in the upcoming year.
Unfortunately for the administrator he did not follow the timelines and the sole evaluation that counted was satisfactory. For this teacher it means that he will not fall under Process A for the upcoming school year and all evaluations and observations will be thrown out.
There is another huge piece to this that I can't divulge at this time. However, suffice to say, I think if we get this second piece, then it will be a huge first victory. For now I'll take the partial victory and know that one of the first things I need to work on for the upcoming school year is to thoroughly educate our administrators on following Process A & B and following the guidelines as set forth in our contract.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comments:
There is a way to make the process more objective and to minimize the impact of a biased administrator. We know what good teaching looks like and how good, learning students behave in the classroom. We can take those best practices and use the as a basis for objective data collection of the classroom behaviors.
For example, class learning time has a strong researched basis as an indicator of good teaching with student learning as an outcome. Using simple technology, it's easy to track the amount of learning time, external interruptions to learning and internal interruptions to learning. If a teacher can provide objective data --not someone's opinion or judgment-- that they have a high percentage of learning time in their classroom, and that students are 'on-task' a high percentage of the time (again, with real data, not someone's impression), they will have a strong case for a designation as a competent teacher. If the collected data shows lower percentages, the progress of improvement can be documented. It's a simple process, easy to implement and resulting in collaborative decisions based on something solid.
You can collected the data with a stopwatch and a pencil, but tools like eCOVE Observation Software [www.ecove.net] make it much easier. And since it's a process of data collection and not evaluation, any competent person can collect the data - administrator, peer teacher, volunteer, or someone outside the district. eCOVE has a wide range of tools (timers and counters) to collect data on best practices and student behaviors.
The objective data avoids so much rankling and provides a basis for professional discussions.
Post a Comment