Just a few days ago Deborah Kenny, Founder of a Charter School in Harlem, NY, authored a piece in the New York Times critical of state and local evaluation systems which tie the ratings of teachers to the scores earned by students on standardized tests.
Ms. Kenny makes a persuasive argument for a more nuanced form of evaluating staff. For instance, Ms. Kenny states that a building principal needs to have the freedom to hire competent people and then to be able to have the correct balance between what she terms 'evaluation and encouragement.' I couldn't agree more! If it's all about tying scores to a teacher's evaluation then what is to become of the negative teacher, on a team of colleagues, whose students score well? Why bother with in-service program or the like? Of what real use then are team leaders, Dept. Chairs, and Principals?
Speaking on school leadership, Ms. Kenny prefers to have a principal who encourages and engenders trust, teamwork and offers candid feedback. These attributes are fundamental to growth and effective teaching and, in turn, student learning.
Perhaps the most profound statement by Ms. Kenny on behalf of a nuanced manner of assessing teacher performance is this statement, "There is no formula for quantifying compassion, creativity and intellectual curiosity." Quite true. A formula concocted by some state or local bureaucrats linking student test scores to teacher evaluations is doomed to fail.
I believe the idea that the enriching process of dynamic teaching and learning will never be able to be assessed by merely quantifying such personal and interactive processes between various individuals.
Dick
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment