New teacher evaluation pilot…and a question

Catalyst Magazine reports that seven Chicago schools will be piloting a new teacher evaluation program this spring.

The new rubric is based on the work of Charlotte Danielson.  This idea has been kicking around CPS for years; Catalyst reported on it in a special issue on teacher evaluation back in 2003.  Golden Apple has used the Danielson rubric for years to guide our selection of excellent teachers for the Golden Apple Award. 

Danielson’s rubric organizes teaching into four domains:

• Planning and Preparation (content knowledge, setting instructional outcomes, coherent instruction, student assessment)
• Classroom Environment (culture for learning, classroom management, organizing physical space)
• Instruction (using questioning and discussion techniques, engaging students, flexibility and responsiveness)
• Professional Responsibilities (professional reflections, accurate records, parent communication, professional development).

The model is not without its critics, though:

Critics of Danielson’s model note that it’s not tied to how students do in class and on tests…

William Sanders, a researcher who has created a system to use student test scores to measure teacher performance, says Danielson assumes wrongly that a certain set of teacher skills and knowledge will invariably bring about better results. “It’s based upon the assumption that the process is highly correlated with the outcome,” he says.

I disagree with his implication that excellent teaching practice doesn’t necessarily improve student learning. But I can’t exactly say that I’ve seen the kind of proof that excellent practice does improve student learning that would silence critics.  Part of the problem is that those of us who support the kind of evaluation of teaching proposed by Danielson are also the kind of teachers who don’t think standardized tests are a great assessment of student learning.  So, where’s the intellectually rigorous rubric for student learning outcomes that we can all get behind?

Labels: