Teacher Ratings Get New Look, Pushed by a
Rich Watcher
By SAM DILLON
NY Times
December 3, 2010
PRINCETON, N.J. — In most American schools, teachers are evaluated by
principals or other administrators who drop in for occasional classroom visits
and fill out forms to rate their performance.
The
result? More
than 9 out of 10 teachers get top marks, according to a prominent study last year by the New Teacher Project, a nonprofit group focusing
on improving teacher quality.
Now Bill Gates, who in recent years has
turned his attention and considerable fortune to improving American education,
is investing $335 million through his foundation to overhaul the personnel
departments of several big school systems. A big chunk of that money is
financing research by dozens of social scientists and thousands of teachers to
develop a better system for evaluating classroom instruction.
The effort will have
enormous consequences for the movement to hold schools and educators more
accountable for student achievement.
Twenty states are
overhauling their teacher-evaluation systems, partly to fulfill plans set in
motion by a $4 billion federal grant competition, and they are eagerly awaiting
the research results.
For teachers, the findings
could mean more scrutiny. But they may also provide more specific guidance
about what is expected of the teachers in the classroom if new experiments with
other measures are adopted — including tests that gauge teachers’ mastery of
their subjects, surveys that ask students about the learning environments in
their classes and digital videos of teachers’ lessons, scored by experts.
“It’s huge,” said Deborah Loewenberg Ball, dean of the University of Michigan School of
Education. “They’re trying to do something nobody’s done before, and do it very
quickly.”
The Gates research is by no
means the first effort of its kind. Economists have already developed a
statistical method called value-added modeling that calculates how much
teachers help their students learn, based on changes in test scores from year
to year. The method allows districts to rank teachers from best to worst.
Value-added modeling is
used in hundreds of districts. But teachers complain that boiling down all they
do into a single statistic offers an incomplete picture; they want more
measures of their performance taken into account.
The Gates research uses
value added as a starting point, but aims to develop other measures that can
not only rate teachers but also help educators understand why one is more
successful than another.
Researchers and educators
involved in the project described it as maddeningly complex in its effort to
separate the attributes of good teaching from the idiosyncrasies of individual
teachers.
Mr. Gates is tracking the
research closely. The use of digital video in particular has caught his
attention. In an interview, he cited its potential for evaluating teachers and
for helping them learn from talented colleagues.
“Some teachers are
extremely good,” Mr. Gates said. “And one of the goals is to say, you know,
‘Let’s go look at those teachers.’ What’s unbelievable is how little the
exemplars have been studied. And then saying, ‘O.K., How do you take a math
teacher who’s in the third quartile and teach them how to get kids interested —
get the kid who’s smart to pay attention, a kid who’s behind to pay attention?’
Teaching a teacher to do that — you have to follow the exemplars.”
The meticulous scoring of
videotaped lessons for this project is unfolding on a scale never undertaken in
educational research, said Catherine A. McClellan, a director for the Educational Testing
Service who is overseeing the process.
By next June, researchers
will have about 24,000 videotaped lessons. Because some must be scored using
more than one protocol, the research will eventually involve reviewing some
64,000 hours of classroom video. Early next year, Dr. McClellan expects to
recruit hundreds of educators and train them to score lessons.
The goal is to help
researchers look for possible correlations between certain teaching practices
and high student achievement, measured by value-added scores. Thomas J. Kane, a
Harvard economist who is
leading the research, is scheduled to announce some preliminary results in
Washington next Friday. More definitive conclusions are expected in about a
year.
The effort has also become
a large-scale field trial of using classroom video, to help teachers improve
and to evaluate them remotely.
“Video lasts,” Dr.
McClellan said, creating possibilities for dialogue among teachers about
improving classroom techniques. “Colleagues can watch your video and say, ‘Right
here — where you did that — try this next time.’ So the teacher learns a new
skill.”
There are advantages for
teacher evaluations, too, Dr. Kane said.
With videos, for instance,
several professionals, rather than just one principal, could rate the same
classroom performance, making ratings less subjective, he said.
“It potentially creates a
cottage industry for retired principals, or even expert teachers, to moonlight
on weekends scoring classroom observations,” he said.
An Internet-based approach
to teacher evaluation could also alleviate some pressures on school districts.
New laws in many states, after all, are requiring more frequent observations of
teachers.
A new evaluation system in
Washington, D.C., for example, requires five observations each year, compared
with the previous systems that required one or two at most, and in many cases
none at all. Starting next fall, a Tennessee law will require at least four
observations a year, rather than one every five years.
In some districts, the increased
pace is straining the workload of administrators. Memphis officials realized
that under the new rules, their district would need to conduct more than 28,000
classroom observations annually, a task that could overwhelm the city’s school
principals.
“This technology can help
us face the logistical challenge of being in so many places at the same time,”
said John Barker, who leads the district’s research and evaluation office.
The district still intends
to have principals visit classrooms, but in January will start a pilot program
to use videotaped observations, he said.
Dr. Kane said the
foundation hoped more school districts would start using classroom videos, for
training and for evaluations, and has worked to keep costs down.
Teachscape,
a contractor providing cameras, software, and other services for the research,
estimated first-year startup costs of about $1.5 million for a district with
140 schools and 7,000 teachers to buy one camera per school and lease the
software to carry out classroom observations using digital video. After that,
annual costs would drop to about $800,000, said Mark Atkinson, the chief
executive of Teachscape, which is based in San
Francisco.
In addition to the cost —
which many struggling districts may consider too high — another barrier could
be teacher opposition. The Memphis teachers union, an affiliate of the National
Education Association, has partnered with the foundation for the project. But
Keith Harris, its president, said the use of videotaped observations in
evaluations raised troubling questions.
“Whose eyes would see these
videos?” Mr. Harris asked. “Who would own them? This seems like an ‘I gotcha’
kind of thing. We think these observations deserve a human being.”
Randi Weingarten, president
of the American Federation
of Teachers, which has several affiliates participating in the research,
also expressed reservations. “Videotaped observations have their role but
shouldn’t be used to substitute for in-person observations to evaluate
teachers,” Ms. Weingarten said. “It would be hard to justify ratings by
outsiders watching videotapes at a remote location who
never visited the classroom and couldn’t see for themselves a teacher’s
interaction and relationship with students.”
Dr. Kane said doubts may
disappear with time. “We’re not naïve,” he said. “We realize that most
principals and teachers imagine an in-person visit from a human being when they
think of classroom observations. But that could rapidly change. It’s not out of
the realm of possibility that millions of classrooms could be using this
technology within four or five years.”