Leadership Matters February 2014

Time to put ’Accountability’ in teacher evaluation _____________________

score so that all teachers receive the same student growth weight. This makes student growth insignificant for individual teachers. While I do feel that the research for using student growth to evaluate individual teachers needs more research and improvement, I think the use of student growth scores over time (three to four years composite scores) does indicate a trend. Combining the student growth scores with the teacher practice evaluation adds creditability to the summative evaluation. I predict that there will be a push from teachers to weigh teacher-made assessments as the primary indicator of student growth. Administrators need to question the validity and reliability of teacher-made assessments and combine these with Type I and II Assessments. Type I examples are NWEA and MAP tests. Type II examples are collaboratively developed common assessments such as curriculum tests and assessments designed by textbook publishers. District administrators need to concentrate on making the performance-based teacher evaluation processes valid and reliable for the final rating of the teacher, not for each individual assessment.

(Continued from page 21)

process. Most districts will be bargaining these issues with their teacher associations in the PERA Joint Committee. The new caveat in this process is that the new law now prescribes that any part of student growth not agreed to at the PERA Joint Committee level will fall back to the state default plan and/or process. As districts and teacher associations learn these new processes together I think it is good for school administrators to remember that you are setting new precedent and making teacher contractual collective bargaining decisions that will affect your administrators, teachers and students for years to come. Once you agree on the many elements that will be required to use student growth for teacher evaluation it will be very hard to change any decision that ends up being beneficial for teachers but not for administrators and/or students. For example, I have heard of districts agreeing to use the whole district growth score for NWEA math and reading or ACT composite scores as the primary factor for determining growth for all teachers. When districts do this, they marginalize the student growth

ISDLAF+ January 2014 Monthly Update

Click here to view the January 2014 ISDLAF+ rates, economic indicators and general economic news brief. To obtain additional information regarding this IASA sponsored service, contact Emmert Dannenberg, statewide marketing director/ISDLAF+ at 815.592.6948. To check daily rates, visit the ISDLAF+ website at www.isdlafplus.com .

22