|
Resolution #8, passed at the CFT 2011 Convention, tasked the EC/K-12 Council with the following:
"...that the California Federation of Teachers take a proactive role and establish a taskforce of education professionals to research, develop, and recommend a series of alternative student achievement measures and other measures of teacher effectiveness that may be used as part of a comprehensive teacher evaluation system."
On August 31 the Task Force met in Sacramento to carry out that resolve. The group was comprised of EC/K-12 President Gary Ravani, UTLA members, Janet Davis, Dan Barnhart, Greg Solkovits, as well as Susan Solomon from UESF.
The group reviewed some dozen or more research papers, studies, and documents on teacher evaluation systems produced by AFT/NEA locals from across the nation. A number of these documents are now posted on the CFT web site (see below). More documents will be posted in the future.
The EC/K-12 Council has received reports from a number of locals that their districts are signaling evaluation will be a consideration in bargaining this year. The posted documents should prove valuable resources for locals negotiating Teacher Evaluation.
During discussion at the Task Force it became clear that there are certain elements of a comprehensive evaluation system that prudent locals should address:
- That a set of "principles" be agreed upon between locals and management to guide discussions around the table;
- that a high quality system of professional development and a PAR program be part of any discussion; and
- that issues of 360 degree accountability be addressed: that is, it is not only teachers who contribute to student's achievement and other stakeholders must have clearly defined responsibilities. High on this list of responsibilities is adequate funding for quality instruction. (See the AFT "Components of a Teacher Evaluation System.")
You will find multiple documents addressing the above issues below.
One of the most informative documents is "Options for Measuring Teacher Effectiveness," from WestEd. It contains a list of possible "alternative measures" for assessing teacher effectiveness. The alternatives and the accompanying, explanatory "tables" require very close reading. Most of the proposed options are non-controversial, including: classroom observation; analysis of classroom artifacts; teacher portfolio; and, self-report of practice. Two options, though, are more problematic: value added; and student evaluation. This is where the close reading comes in. Checking the "table," under reliability and validity, will show that both options are lacking for summative evaluation. There is some momentum around including student and/or parent survey information in teacher evaluations. Extreme caution is advised.
There will be a presentation of UTLA's and UESF's progress at the upcoming EC/K-12 Council meeting on Friday, September 23rd. All should plan on attending.
|
