The following appeared in the same paper today, the Albuquerque Journal. The first is about how Colorado teachers accept the new evaluation system and the second is how neighboring New Mexico teachers reject it.
Colo. teachers on board with new system
T.S. Last / Journal Staff Writer7 hours ago
Posted: 12:05 am
After some initial resistance, teachers in Colorado are
going along with a new teacher evaluation plan being rolled
out this year.
Mike Wetzel, a spokesman for the Colorado Education Association, the state affiliate of the NEA, said the union originally opposed SB 10-191, the 2010 law that put the teacher evaluation plan in place. But since it became law, the union that represents approximately 30,000 Colorado teachers is moving ahead with the new plan.
“It’s the law now, and we believe we need to make this the best law we can for students, teachers, principals and everyone involved in the system,” he said. “We want this system to be a tool for teachers and principals to raise performance.”
Wetzel said teachers were at first concerned about how evaluations could be used against them, but the union has stressed the benefits of the feedback they get from them.
He said teachers still feel a fair amount of anxiety over the system, because it’s something new, “but what we’ve done is, we’ve tried to lessen that anxiety with training across the state. We find the more information teachers get, the anxiety lessens.”
The Colorado model is similar to New Mexico’s in that 50 percent of the evaluation is based on student academic growth using test scores.
But while classroom observations count for 25 percent of a teacher’s evaluation in New Mexico, under the Colorado model, observations are just part of the second half of the evaluation, which is supposed to measure “professional practice.”
“In order to fill out our rubric, there would be some measure of observation, but there’s really no way to quantify it as a percentage,” said Katy Anthes, executive director of educator effectiveness for the Colorado Department of Education.
Anthes said there’s a learning curve for everyone involved, but it seems the state’s educators are beginning to grasp it.
Wetzel said one reason teachers have been accepting the new plan was that they were involved in the process of developing it. Input was taken from teachers and three teachers served on the state’s Council for Educator Effectiveness that helped design the system.
“If I had any advice for New Mexico, I think it would be that the teachers’ voices are critical,” he said. “This is not something that should be done to teachers, but something that should be done with teachers.”
Collaboration, helps create a system that “improves the practice of teaching … the results you get will be better for students, and that’s what everybody wants – what’s best for kids.”
Mike Wetzel, a spokesman for the Colorado Education Association, the state affiliate of the NEA, said the union originally opposed SB 10-191, the 2010 law that put the teacher evaluation plan in place. But since it became law, the union that represents approximately 30,000 Colorado teachers is moving ahead with the new plan.
“It’s the law now, and we believe we need to make this the best law we can for students, teachers, principals and everyone involved in the system,” he said. “We want this system to be a tool for teachers and principals to raise performance.”
Wetzel said teachers were at first concerned about how evaluations could be used against them, but the union has stressed the benefits of the feedback they get from them.
He said teachers still feel a fair amount of anxiety over the system, because it’s something new, “but what we’ve done is, we’ve tried to lessen that anxiety with training across the state. We find the more information teachers get, the anxiety lessens.”
The Colorado model is similar to New Mexico’s in that 50 percent of the evaluation is based on student academic growth using test scores.
But while classroom observations count for 25 percent of a teacher’s evaluation in New Mexico, under the Colorado model, observations are just part of the second half of the evaluation, which is supposed to measure “professional practice.”
“In order to fill out our rubric, there would be some measure of observation, but there’s really no way to quantify it as a percentage,” said Katy Anthes, executive director of educator effectiveness for the Colorado Department of Education.
Also factoring
into the model are such elements as self-assessment, review
of goals and performance plan, classroom observations, a
mid- and end-of-year review, and planning for the next
school year.
Colorado’s teacher evaluation system was piloted last year
and this year is a hold-harmless year.Anthes said there’s a learning curve for everyone involved, but it seems the state’s educators are beginning to grasp it.
Wetzel said one reason teachers have been accepting the new plan was that they were involved in the process of developing it. Input was taken from teachers and three teachers served on the state’s Council for Educator Effectiveness that helped design the system.
“If I had any advice for New Mexico, I think it would be that the teachers’ voices are critical,” he said. “This is not something that should be done to teachers, but something that should be done with teachers.”
Collaboration, helps create a system that “improves the practice of teaching … the results you get will be better for students, and that’s what everybody wants – what’s best for kids.”
Evaluating … the evaluations: Critics decry new system for rating teachers; supporters say it helps kids
by T.S. Last / Journal Northern Bureau | 6 hours ago
Copyright © 2013 Albuquerque
Journal
While teachers and administrators
at Albuquerque Public Schools have been vocal in opposing the
state’s new teacher evaluation program – hundreds of APS
teachers rallied at a protest attended by the superintendent
last month – the reaction has been mixed elsewhere in the state.
At Santa Fe Public Schools,
teachers are critical of the new evaluation system but without a
major outcry, and the district is collaborating with the state
as it moves forward with evaluations.
Down south, in the state’s
second-largest school district, Las Cruces, the teacher’s union
strongly opposes the new system.
Davida
Garcia teaches an English class at Santa Fe High School.
Although teachers in the district are critical of the
state’s new teacher evaluation system, the district is
collaborating with the Public Education Department in moving
forward. (Eddie Moore/Albuquerque Journal)
And within
Albuquerque, at least one state charter school says a similar
teacher evaluation system has helped improve test scores and
the quality of teaching.
Santa Fe just wrapped
up the first of three rounds of classroom observations each
teacher will undergo this school year. The observations make
up 25 percent of teacher assessments under the state Public
Education Department’s NMTEACH evaluation plan.
“We’re all scrambling
to meet the Nov. 1 deadline the district imposed to have the
first ones completed,” said Santa Fe High principal Leslie
Kilmer, who had just left a meeting of district principals
last week. “It’s been hectic.”
Reaching an accord
with the state in mid-August, Santa Fe was one of the first
districts to have its teacher evaluation plan approved by
state Public Education Department.
Superintendent Joel
Boyd said the district was initially “wary” of what was being
imposed on it but decided to work within the rule in a
collaborative effort with PED.
“This is a difficult
process. It’s an extraordinary shift in how we go about
evaluating our teachers,” Boyd said. “This is an extremely
heavy lift for our district and is creating some anxiety among
teachers. But we’re committed to doing it together and working
side by side with our teachers because a change is definitely
needed.”
In contrast, APS
Superintendent Winston Brooks has been sharply critical of
many of the system’s details and the state has rejected APS’
proposed alternatives, which varied greatly from the state
plan.
Boyd said the Santa Fe
school district collaborated with teachers before negotiating
its plan with PED in which student surveys reduce the
Standards-Based Assessment testing component value by 5
percent.
SBA and other test
scores are used to measure student achievement growth under
PED’s model and are supposed to count for 50 percent of the
overall evaluation. Instead, the test scores in Santa Fe
account for 45 percent of a teacher’s rating.
PED’s model also calls
for 25 percent of the evaluation to be based on classroom
observations by a school administrator and another 25 percent
on locally adopted measures approved by the state.
Under its agreement
with PED, Santa Fe’s evaluations break down this way: 45
percent based on test scores, 10 percent from the student
surveys of teacher performance, 25 percent on classroom
observation, and 20 percent on measures of teacher planning
and professionalism.
Bernice García Baca,
president of the National Education Association’s Santa Fe
chapter, said teachers there are accepting of incorporating
teacher evaluations into a system of “shared accountability”
that the school district is working to instill.
But she thinks the
plan put forth by PED is too rigid and places too much
emphasis on testing.
“Teaching is a skilled
art, it really is,” she said. “The creativity that we all
remember being a part of teaching is really being limited by
the system PED is subjecting us to. Trying to quantify it by
sifting it down to numbers makes no sense at all.”
Education
Secretary-designate Hanna Skandera doesn’t see it that way.
“I reflect on the old
system, which was 100 percent subjective,” she said. “Also, it
was binary, meaning either you met competency or you didn’t,
which is rigid.”
Skandera said the art
of teaching is captured by the new evaluation system. Through
classroom observations and student surveys, teachers get
feedback on how well they engage students and how well they
are getting through to them.
“Through these
evaluations, we can capture and acknowledge highly effective
teachers, and for those teachers who are struggling we can
capture where improvement is needed,” she said. “It gives us
the opportunity to acknowledge good teaching while putting
kids first.”
In
October, a rally at Del Norte High School in Albuquerque
heard speakers opposing teacher evaluations and more tests
for New Mexico students. (Greg Sorber/Albuquerque Journal)
‘Going
with the flow’
García Baca said
teachers in the City Different are no different from their
colleagues elsewhere in the state who have strong reservations
about the evaluation plan. But there hasn’t been the kind of
uproar there has been in Albuquerque, where 600 to 700 people
attended a demonstration last month protesting the new teacher
evaluation program and testing methods.
“This town is good at
going with the flow,” García Baca said of Santa Fe. “It’s
something we just have to deal with. We do the best we can and
try to change things as we go along.”
She said Santa Fe’s
teacher corps has had morale issues in recent years, but much
of that can be attributed to wages. Santa Fe teachers hadn’t
received a raise in more than five years until they received a
1.5 percent bump in August.
She said the biggest
objection she and the union have with the new system is the
emphasis on student achievement growth, measured by students’
SBA test scores.
She especially objects
to the “group achievement growth” component contained within
that measure. It factors in results from past years and in
some cases uses test scores from students the teacher never
had in the classroom.
García Baca’s biggest
concern, however, is the emphasis on testing. She said
teachers complain that they spend so much time testing, or
preparing their students for tests, they don’t have time to
hone their craft. She noted that in Santa Fe, there’s mandated
testing going on somewhere in the district 15 days out of each
month.
Skandera said that,
over the course of an entire school year, about 1,100 hours
are available for instruction. Her data suggested that the
total time spent on conducting student assessments amounts to
about 1 percent – a little more than that at the high school
level and a little less at lower grade levels.
Skandera noted that
teachers or union representatives were involved while the new
evaluation system was being vetted. And she said teachers also
provided input for what they thought was important for
students to learn, and tests are designed to reflect learning.
“If we’re assessing
what we want our students to learn, that’s a good thing,” she
said.
Different
unions
Most teachers in Santa
Fe are represented by the NEA, whereas the American Federation
of Teachers is the dominant union in Albuquerque.
García Baca speculated
that more outcry might be coming from Albuquerque because it’s
by far the largest school district in the state and AFT has
more of a presence in the Duke City.
“The union in
Albuquerque is more visible and has two full-time people
working for them,” García Baca said. “AFT tends to be more
obstinate. There’s more energy because of the full-time
people, and they tend to be more aggressive with their
opposition, especially with the new PED under Skandera.”
AFT New Mexico last
month joined a small group of teachers and state legislators
in filing a legal petition in state District Court in an
effort to stop the PED from implementing its teacher
evaluation plan.
NEA New Mexico may be
headed down that same road. Late last month, its state board
passed a resolution for its leadership to consult with general
counsel to explore a legal course of action.
“So many of us think
this will all blow over in a year or two – maybe if there’s a
change in governors,” García Baca said. “But we can’t count on
that, so it was decided to step things up a little bit.”
Despite her criticism
of the PED’s evaluation plan, García Baca said she hopes it
will eventually evolve into something that restores the art to
teaching and better reflects the effectiveness of a good
teacher.
“Maybe we have a false
hope, but I think most of us are hoping that we will make
worthwhile changes as time goes on,” she said.
Kilmer said there is
some consternation over the evaluations. “With my teachers at
Santa Fe High School, I’m sure there is concern because this
is something new,” she said. “I’ve tried hard not to stress
them out, because I know that there is that level of concern.
But I know my teachers are working hard and doing the best
they can.”
Kilmer said she thinks
the evaluations can serve as a good tool teachers can use to
improve, but it will take time to refine.
“Something I’ve
emphasized is that this is a process, not an event,” she said.
“It’s not perfect, but we’re all learning, and we expect it to
get better little by little. We’re trying to work through the
process and work out the kinks.”
Las Cruces
In Las Cruces, NEA
representative Patrick Sanchez said teachers’ reaction to the
teacher evaluation system has been “close to nuclear.”
“Teachers feel they
are under attack,” he said. “They don’t think this is going to
do anything but exacerbate testing, and we’re already test
crazy.”
Las Cruces Public
Schools’ evaluation process has been approved by PED and is
underway. One piece of the evaluation is being left to the
teachers themselves.
Superintendent Stan
Rounds initially planned to tell PED the district would use
teacher attendance as a component to count for 10 percent of
the evaluation, but backed off after hearing opposition from
teachers.
Telling them he wants
to be fair, Rounds last week told teachers they could decide
for themselves what would make up that portion of their
evaluation, either teacher attendance or a yet-to-be-developed
student survey.
“The choice is yours,”
he says on a nearly five-minute video memo to teachers posted
on the district’s website.
Rounds explains that
PED sets the rules that school districts must follow, and the
district has control over a small portion of the composition
of the evaluation.
He tells teachers he
appreciates their hard work, trusts them and believes they
should have an opportunity to decide the criteria to be used
for the part of the evaluation the district can control.
“So we get to pick our
poison,” Sanchez said. “But (the student surveys) haven’t been
developed yet, so what kind of choice is that?”
PED already rejected
the district’s first two evaluation proposals.
Jo Galván, spokeswoman
for Las Cruces schools, said after receiving input from
teachers, the district submitted proposals that included such
things as professional development, pursuit of advanced
degrees, service on committees or as a sponsor of a student
club to count as part of their evaluations.
PED rejected those
ideas, but Galván said PED told them it would accept teacher
attendance or student surveys.
Nothing to
fear
At
left, Kathy Sandoval-Snider, principal of the Albuquerque
Institute for Math and Science, cheers students
participating in a PE activity while evaluating teacher Paul
De Herrera, who is next to her. (Marla Brose/Albuquerque
Journal)
In contrast to the
harsh criticism by APS leadership, the union and many
teachers, one Duke City school administrator can’t understand
what all the fuss is about.
“A lot of the fear and
complaints about the evaluation system that’s on the table are
fraught with error,” said Kathy Sandoval-Snider, director of
the Albuquerque Institute for Mathematics and Science. “I
don’t know where people are coming up with some of this stuff.
If their intent is to scare the crud out of teachers, they are
doing very well.”
Sandoval-Snider
attributes the teacher evaluation system her school
implemented to playing a crucial role in the leap in student
success that has occurred in recent years at AIMS, a
state-sponsored charter school for grades six through 12
located on the University of New Mexico south campus.
She boasts that AIMS
is the only charter school in New Mexico, and one of just 12
in the country, recognized as a 2013 National Blue Ribbon
School by the U.S. Department of Education. “But we weren’t
always very good,” she said.
The school has some
built-in advantages – it’s small, with 312 students reported
for 2013-14. Also, 30 percent of its students are eligible for
reduced or free lunches based on income, compared to 64
percent in Albuquerque Public Schools. Families who send their
children to AIMS are involved enough to enter a lottery
seeking admission and there is a waiting list.
Still, Sandoval-Snider
said it wasn’t until her school started implementing a teacher
evaluation system five years ago that things started to
improve.
Sandoval-Snider said
that, in 2007, incoming sixth-graders at AIMS were measured to
be 37 percent proficient in reading and 42 percent proficient
in math.
“That same class (now
in the 12th grade) is now 100 percent proficient in both
reading and math,” she said. “I’m convinced, and my staff is
convinced, that it’s because our teachers now have the tools
they can use to help with instruction.”
Sandoval-Snider, who
in 2011 was appointed by Gov. Susana Martinez to serve on an
effective teaching task force, said one of those tools is a
comprehensive system of evaluating the impact of teachers in
the classroom, the framework of which she said was similar to
the one introduced by PED.
Teachers are evaluated
four times per year, twice by administrative staff, once by an
experienced teacher and once by a neutral specialist
affiliated with UNM. Together with test scores, these
observations are used to evaluate teachers.
The teachers receive
feedback after each observation, including suggestions for
improvement and a framework of support. Teachers in each
department and at each grade level meet to develop goals for
professional growth, which are all data-driven and tied to
student achievement. They then develop interventions and
classroom strategies that can be applied in the classroom the
next day. The results are reported back to their teacher
groups.
Sandoval-Snider said
the evaluations allow teachers to fine tune their teaching.
“We wanted (an
evaluation system) that was objective and with multiple
components, but also gave teachers scores that tell them this
is what we’ve got to work on,” she said. “It gives them the
power to make good decisions, and every decision is made with
the classroom in mind.”
No comments:
Post a Comment