It's time for a better evaluation system

Considerable time and effort are spent evaluating teachers without much to show for it.  Rarely does a teacher excel in teaching and credit their evaluation system for helping them to get where they are.  Evaluation systems rely on overworked administrators that nearly always end up accomplishing compliance rather than effective feedback, evaluation and improvement.  This causes the administrator to rely on a rubric that often is inappropriate. For example, our district uses the same rubric to evaluate my chemistry class as well as physical education, elementary, special education, etc.  The systems on these rubrics are most inappropriate because they evaluate the teacher and classroom environment relative to an expectation. The end goal is the initial evaluation.

I teach science using the modeling pedagogy.  The big philosophical difference between modeling and traditional teaching is that in traditional teaching the student is explained what the final objective or standard is and then this is repeated with variety as the student approaches that standard.  Modeling, in contrast, starts with where the student is. What is the current understanding of this concept and how can this student construct models from their understanding that are revised when the models fail or require change to explain discrepancies.  A big flaw in traditional learning is that by focusing on the final product in lieu of the status quo for the student we build concepts with lots of holes and misconceptions. In a constructivist approach students are more likely to identify and deconstruct these misconceptions.  

How can we shift teaching evaluations from a traditional model to a constructivist approach?  We need much more contact time with teachers. Administrators do not have the capability to accomplish this.  I have had some of the most talented administrators that I could have ever expected and yet I rarely see anything of value from my evaluations.  Instead we should create positions dedicated to evaluation and observation only. If a position was only spent meeting with teachers on prep periods, setting goals with teachers, observing teachers, giving feedback to teachers and connecting teachers the evaluation system improves dramatically.  This changes the evaluations from punitive to feedback and change focus from busy work and compliance to improvement and growth.

Teaching is very isolating.  Teachers are alone in their classrooms for the majority of their career.  Even when teachers meet with other teachers and do professional development it is very easy to continue doing the same things.  But having a quality teacher working with you is a tremendous advantage. An employee that does observations full time will get to experience the strengths of a school and will be able to connect teachers based on strengths, weaknesses and goals.  If a teacher wants to work on assessment, the evaluator will know who does assessment well and can facilitate connecting them. The larger amount of contact time also allows the evaluator to observe the teachers more frequently, more informally and also work on planning.  You would get better consistency by having fewer people doing evaluations and since they would spend more time with each teacher.

This would also open up some time for overworked administrators to spend less time fulfilling compliance requirements and instead have positive impacts on their staff and students.  Currently most administrators can spend their entire day answering emails, attending meetings and dealing with disciplinary infractions. By opening up their time they would be able to work on mentoring programs, developing professional development, being more visible in the school and whatever creative programs they desire to implement.