Tuesday, July 5, 2011

NJ Educator Effectiveness Task Force

Governor Chris Christie, in October 2010, issued the New Jersey Educator Effectiveness Task Force. Comprised an eclectic group of seasoned educators, its goal was to provide a blueprint for an evaluative system. This system is intended to create an effective set of measures that educational administration can use to help designate tenure status and compensation levels. The strategy concocted by the task force calls for a two pronged evaluation focused on measuring the performance of teachers and principals.

The teacher evaluation in encompasses two distinct sections; student achievement and teacher practice. The student achievement portion of the teacher evaluation places a heavy emphasis on student growth. Student growth is intended to be measured by improving grades in statewide assessments. The remaining percentage of student achievement subsection of the teacher evaluation is derived from a school wide assessment, and an optional assessment that are approved by the state. The teacher practice subsections are divided into classroom observations and another measure of teacher practice. Allotting between 50 to 95 percent of the teacher practice section is the teacher observation subsection. This gives administration some flexibility on the grading procedure of teachers. It is important to note that veteran teachers are expected to conduct and grade the observations objectively. The second subsection under the teacher practice section is conducted with additional state-approved assessment of the school administrations choosing.

The principal evaluative program aims to measure three key areas of effective school administrators. The first is retaining effective teachers, which has the duplicity of also measuring the principal’s ability to “exit” teachers who are not deemed effective. Teacher retention and “exiting” comprises 10 percent of the evaluation. The second portion of the evaluation is based on the educational leadership qualities exuded by the principal. It is recommended that the Commissioner (person in charge of evaluating principals) create their own tools for educational leadership evaluation or adopt the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium’s educational leadership policy standards. The final section evaluating principals falls under the student achievement category. This accounts for 50 percent of the principal’s evaluation (just like the teacher evaluation). Student achievement is measured as a school specific goal (such as dropout rate reduction) and the aggregated state-test scores for the principal’s students.

The task force proposal’s greatest strengths have within them its greatest weaknesses. The general flexibility of the evaluative processes makes a clear statement that this new idea for greater accountability in schools is still in its infancy. Each school can create its own grading rubric for its teachers and principals, and can go as far as to create their own testing protocols upon state review. The amount of accountability and decision making tools provided by a quantifiable assessment of teachers and principals is staggering. It is feasible to have full-fledged grades on the effectiveness of each educational professional. These grades can translate into higher pay, tenure, or in some cases firings. Sadly this flexibility can lead to abuse, as each state can distort their grading systems to appear as efficient as they please. Beyond systemic abuse, teacher observational data can also be can tampered with should a teacher not be objective or have an agenda.

This task force evaluation is another attempt to standardize the American educational system. The hope is that by making testing and teacher/principal evaluations uniform that the education provided will be of higher quality. Yet perhaps students would benefit more from a radical overhaul of how education is provided rather than another means to quantify that the educational process is not up to par.

No comments:

Post a Comment