How to evaluate Seattle teachers

How does a school district make sure it has the best teachers in the classroom? The way that question is answered might determine whether Seattle teachers sign a new contract before the new school year begins, or go on strike.

A big issue separating teacher’s union and district negotiators is a little word – MAP. It stands for Measures of Academic Progress, and it’s a computerized test Seattle students in all grade levels take throughout the year to demonstrate whether their knowledge in the basics of math and reading.

Many teachers are frustrated with the standardized tests because they say it takes away from instructional time by pulling students out of the classroom up to six times a year for testing.

“It doesn’t count for their grade in for that class. It doesn’t count toward graduation. It doesn’t count toward college. It doesn’t count toward career,” says Julie, a Seattle high school counselor.

Teaching to the test

I talked with a group of five Seattle educators – representing elementary, middle school, high school, and special education – for about an hour. I agreed not to identify them by their schools or full names so they would feel free to talk openly about their concerns. They are all frustrated that the Seattle School District wants to tie a portion of their teacher evaluations to how well students do on the MAP tests.

The teachers support a new four-tier evaluation system, but they say the link to student test scores “came out of left field.” That was not part of the evaluation program the union agreed to with district administrators before the summer break. They say it was “mandated” at the last minute.

Ed, who works with high school special education students, says holding teachers directly responsible for student performance isn’t fair. It’s like saying a doctor is to blame for a patient’s illness. Would you fire a doctor because the patient didn’t follow healthy eating advice and became overweight?

“The kid could have not slept that day. The kid could have had his dad and mom squabbling at home,” he explains. “Any number of things impact the score of a specific test on a specific day and to hold the teacher responsible for that just is totally inappropriate.”

If the district links educators’ evaluations to student progress on MAP tests, teachers worry they’ll be forced to “teach to the test” and make sure everything they teach lines up exactly with what’s on the test.

“Science, history, geography, art, music – all of these things are at the core of a liberal arts education,” says Rebecca. “They get taken away when the main focus becomes testing. And by connecting teacher evaluations to testing you really risk very much affecting what kids are learning in the classroom.”

Their greater worry is that the district will use the results of these evaluations to fire dozens if not hundreds of teachers locally, as school leaders have done in Washington D.C. Last month the school chancellor there, Michelle Rhee, fired 241 D.C. teachers. They also have a performance appraisal system that holds teachers accountable for students’ standardized test scores.

Firing teachers here would put students in great danger, according to Seattle Education Association President Olga Addae, who says school might be “the only safety net” for many children.

“I’m going to bite my tongue because it is emotionally disheartening to me,” she says.

Other teachers question Dr. Maria Goodloe Johnson’s support of the MAP testing program because she’s a board member of the Northwest Evaluation Association. They administer the MAP tests.

Evaluation is optional, with incentives

Now, the district’s response to the teachers’ concerns.

They say there is “no conflict of interest” with the superintendent’s roll on the non-profit board. She is not paid for that position, and she sits on a lot of education boards.

Teresa Wipple with Seattle Schools also says teachers don’t have to participate in the evaluation system the district calls SERVE – Support, Empower, Recognize, and Value Educators.

“There are some financial incentives involved if they do participate, but they are certainly welcome to opt out,” says Wipple. The plan calls for an immediate one percent pay increase for those who sign up. The district is counting on voters to pass an education levy in November because that’s how they would pay for the teachers’ incentive money.

What’s not optional, the district says, is having classrooms with below average teachers.

Former teacher and principal Phil Brockman, now on the district’s contract bargaining team, says the evaluation process is meant to give teachers better, objective feedback about how they’re doing in the classroom. The district will also provide support for teachers to boost their performance, along with student achievement.

“I’m a believer in accountability and how to hold teachers accountable for what’s happening in the classroom,” he says.

The Seattle School Board holds an executive session tonight to discuss teacher contract talks, followed by a public meeting. Teachers tell me they’ll be at that meeting “in force.”

Resources:

SEA 2010 Bargaining Proposals

Seattle Public Schools Labor Relations documents

Related stories:

Seattle teachers’ challenges and rewards

Seattle teachers pushed toward a strike

Maria Goodloe-Johnson responds to critics