When it comes to teacher evaluations, there are a lot of important factors to consider. Do we focus on things like state test scores and arbitrary meetings? Do we make it a surprise, or something the teacher can plan around? Where do the students and their growth play into all of this?
The sad thing is, for a long time, the student's growth meant hardly anything compared to the outcomes on tests. Despite vastly different start points and end points, not to mention the myriad ways that people, young and old, all are different and unique in their own ways, we relied quite heavily on a one-size-fits-all rubric, but many organizations are attempting to change that. For example, we have the Danielson Framework, which tries to set our a very comprehensive rubric for teachers focusing on four domains: Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities. Each of these domains have smaller component parts, and those are all ranked from unsatisfactory to distinguished, letting teachers see precisely, in hard, clear terms, where they can improve and grow.
Similar to that is the Teaching as Leadership Rubric, which is used more to reflect on yourself as a teacher, keeping focuses much like the Danielson Framework, but also adding in areas for reflection in the teacher's mind. And then, of course, we have the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS) which combines a look at the student test scores with factors measuring student growth and progress over their time at school.
Personally, while I haven't been evaluated myself, I would put a little more weight in the TVAAS, depending on how it was conducted. I would assume that teachers should have notification that classroom assessments are coming, with a meeting for pre-evaluation, but the assessment itself could happen randomly, so teachers can't try to make sure their "highly polished" work is on display rather than their best day-to-day work. After that, a cool down meeting with the people evaluating you would be good to see where improvements could be made and where explanations might clear up some misunderstandings on their part. Finally, I believe a self-reflection/assessment would not be amiss, along with student feedback and, finally, the test scores and growth indexes of the student. This is not to imply that the figures and numbers aren't important: unfortunately, we're a goal-oriented society, and an incredibly engaging teacher than never gets students to where they need to be is not as useful, in a public school setting, as a slightly more boring teacher than gets the job done well and gets those test scores high.
On my end, I believe the most effective evaluation would cover everything: in class viewing, student feedback, self reflection, peer feedback, student growth markers, and test scores compared to other students at the same level. This huge array of data STILL wouldn't get the comprehensive evaluation of all of a teacher's effectiveness, but it would do wonders for making sure that the people doing the evaluating know as much as they can and can make informed, logical decisions as they rank the teachers.
Teachers are already underpaid, under appreciated, and under-funded. The one thing they shouldn't be is under-represented when it comes time to make a case for or against one's performance.
Tuesday, July 18, 2017
Tuesday, July 4, 2017
The Importance of Pre-Assessment
Using Quizlet I created a quick pre-assessment of some terms students should know in relation to reading literature at this level, some that may or may not have been acquired yet, and a few that I expect they won't know off the top of their head (following the link, you can click "test" to create a quiz, or simply use these terms as flashcards for studying after the initial pre-assessment). I created this in relation to the following Common Core 9/10th Grade English Literature Reading Standard:
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.9-10.5
Analyze how an author's choices concerning how to structure a text, order events within it (e.g., parallel plots), and manipulate time (e.g., pacing, flashbacks) create such effects as mystery, tension, or surprise.
... with the objective being that, by the end of the unit, 80% of students will be able to define, identify, and analyze any or all instances of the terms I gave when used in a piece of literature. I would print out the first test, giving it to the entire class to see what kind of knowledge they have on the terms attached to the subject. After doing so, I would follow the steps listed in this flowchart to determine how I would move forward with differentiating instruction for students who are excelling, on par, and/or falling behind. These students would be easy to identify, as Quizlet shows you results based on who got which questions right, as well as whether or not a majority of the class did so.
With the initial quiz, I would expect an average student at the 9th/10th grade level to score about a 60 or 70%, with scores higher than this belonging to students who are a little more knowledgeable about literary terms. Students performing above that level would have their comprehension tested, and if they were proving to do well at it, would be challenged with additional work or deeper, more intricate questions when it comes to regular quizzes to check for learning.
All students would have regular quizzes to assess how they were learning, at least once a week, on vocabulary and comprehension of the piece we were reading (for the sake of this assignment, I shall say the students are reading Shakespeare's Hamlet). Students at the remedial level would quickly be drilled into remembering the vocabulary, while students at the meeting level would learn the last few words' meanings from repetition. As students began to show consistent proficiency on the vocabulary section (something that could be measured on Quizlet), it would be removed from those who no longer need it, with a greater focus on the quiz going to reading comprehension and critical thinking questions.
For students who continue to struggle, I will provide the option of being given an oral examination, in case their continued low score comes from the testing itself and not the knowledge base. They will also be prompted with questions that focus more specifically on areas they are struggling with, giving more explanations to Foils or Flashbacks, while the bulk of the class might have a question asking about the same sort of thing, but without a clear starting point or instance in the play provided. If the issue is in the reading itself, due to a disability or not having learned a good reading strategy, the options become either letting them watch a visual version or listen to an audio version of the play, or else spend time in drills to help improve reading speed to help them in other subjects. Both of these can be effective, depending on the students and their needs, and a blend of both is not out of the question.
For students that excel, the quizzes would quickly drop the vocabulary portion, focusing on comprehension of the reading. If they begin to excel there too, we will begin to reach for critical thinking questions and "Why" and "How" questions about the plot and story line instead of "What" questions. If students begin to excel even here, the opportunity arises to offer them a chance at a side project or comparing Hamlet to another of Shakespeare's works to compare similarities and differences, or compare Shakespeare's works to another author's to see how the same ideas present themselves in new contexts.
The summative assessment can come in two forms, depending on how the students catch up or speed ahead (for the sake of the flowchart, I showed the "Single unified test" path). Either there will be one test for everyone, with the expectation that they are all to get past a certain score, or there will be versions of the test for remedial, proficient, and advanced learners catering to the lessons learned. This is a double edged sword, as it keeps the advanced learners engaged and doesn't make them feel like their time is wasted while making sure that less proficient learners are meeting the standards in their own test, but also provides more opportunity for unintentional testing biases as questions are tailored to the student and questions are purposefully made easier or more difficult depending on past performance. I personally believe in giving everyone one test and giving extra credit or rewards to students that go further, rather than punishing them with extra mandatory work that may bring down their grade, but this is a balancing act that will need careful consideration with each and every class.
In the end, even on a subject as seemingly simple as this, clear divisions in the class can become apparent, and one should make sure not to hold back the fast students just because the slower ones need to catch up. Each set of students should be given their own challenges and goals to better themselves, with summative assessments, ideally, to be a capstone for whatever they achieved rather than simply a marker to move them from one unit to another.
=============================================================
A note on Quizlet: While I think this app is fantastic for creating quick quizzes and using for flash cards or review/study material, this isn't a solution to all sections of the class. For example, some students here may know the definition, but not actually know how to identify it, leading to this pre-assessment being followed up or paired with a short reading comprehension section where they are given a cutting from a story (a page or so) and asked to identify any instances of the terms listed in the Quizlet. Students who need help here would get a different version of study aid than students to failed the initial quiz. That said, for the purposes of this blog, I am pretending to be functioning purely off of that initial quiz
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.9-10.5
Analyze how an author's choices concerning how to structure a text, order events within it (e.g., parallel plots), and manipulate time (e.g., pacing, flashbacks) create such effects as mystery, tension, or surprise.
... with the objective being that, by the end of the unit, 80% of students will be able to define, identify, and analyze any or all instances of the terms I gave when used in a piece of literature. I would print out the first test, giving it to the entire class to see what kind of knowledge they have on the terms attached to the subject. After doing so, I would follow the steps listed in this flowchart to determine how I would move forward with differentiating instruction for students who are excelling, on par, and/or falling behind. These students would be easy to identify, as Quizlet shows you results based on who got which questions right, as well as whether or not a majority of the class did so.
With the initial quiz, I would expect an average student at the 9th/10th grade level to score about a 60 or 70%, with scores higher than this belonging to students who are a little more knowledgeable about literary terms. Students performing above that level would have their comprehension tested, and if they were proving to do well at it, would be challenged with additional work or deeper, more intricate questions when it comes to regular quizzes to check for learning.
All students would have regular quizzes to assess how they were learning, at least once a week, on vocabulary and comprehension of the piece we were reading (for the sake of this assignment, I shall say the students are reading Shakespeare's Hamlet). Students at the remedial level would quickly be drilled into remembering the vocabulary, while students at the meeting level would learn the last few words' meanings from repetition. As students began to show consistent proficiency on the vocabulary section (something that could be measured on Quizlet), it would be removed from those who no longer need it, with a greater focus on the quiz going to reading comprehension and critical thinking questions.
For students who continue to struggle, I will provide the option of being given an oral examination, in case their continued low score comes from the testing itself and not the knowledge base. They will also be prompted with questions that focus more specifically on areas they are struggling with, giving more explanations to Foils or Flashbacks, while the bulk of the class might have a question asking about the same sort of thing, but without a clear starting point or instance in the play provided. If the issue is in the reading itself, due to a disability or not having learned a good reading strategy, the options become either letting them watch a visual version or listen to an audio version of the play, or else spend time in drills to help improve reading speed to help them in other subjects. Both of these can be effective, depending on the students and their needs, and a blend of both is not out of the question.
For students that excel, the quizzes would quickly drop the vocabulary portion, focusing on comprehension of the reading. If they begin to excel there too, we will begin to reach for critical thinking questions and "Why" and "How" questions about the plot and story line instead of "What" questions. If students begin to excel even here, the opportunity arises to offer them a chance at a side project or comparing Hamlet to another of Shakespeare's works to compare similarities and differences, or compare Shakespeare's works to another author's to see how the same ideas present themselves in new contexts.
The summative assessment can come in two forms, depending on how the students catch up or speed ahead (for the sake of the flowchart, I showed the "Single unified test" path). Either there will be one test for everyone, with the expectation that they are all to get past a certain score, or there will be versions of the test for remedial, proficient, and advanced learners catering to the lessons learned. This is a double edged sword, as it keeps the advanced learners engaged and doesn't make them feel like their time is wasted while making sure that less proficient learners are meeting the standards in their own test, but also provides more opportunity for unintentional testing biases as questions are tailored to the student and questions are purposefully made easier or more difficult depending on past performance. I personally believe in giving everyone one test and giving extra credit or rewards to students that go further, rather than punishing them with extra mandatory work that may bring down their grade, but this is a balancing act that will need careful consideration with each and every class.
In the end, even on a subject as seemingly simple as this, clear divisions in the class can become apparent, and one should make sure not to hold back the fast students just because the slower ones need to catch up. Each set of students should be given their own challenges and goals to better themselves, with summative assessments, ideally, to be a capstone for whatever they achieved rather than simply a marker to move them from one unit to another.
=============================================================
A note on Quizlet: While I think this app is fantastic for creating quick quizzes and using for flash cards or review/study material, this isn't a solution to all sections of the class. For example, some students here may know the definition, but not actually know how to identify it, leading to this pre-assessment being followed up or paired with a short reading comprehension section where they are given a cutting from a story (a page or so) and asked to identify any instances of the terms listed in the Quizlet. Students who need help here would get a different version of study aid than students to failed the initial quiz. That said, for the purposes of this blog, I am pretending to be functioning purely off of that initial quiz
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)