I’m a big fan of the reforms happening in DC. I like it for a lot of reasons (it’s cutting edge, it’s gutsy, it’s far reaching implications, etc.) but mostly because Michelle Rhee has vision (and the cajones) to bring her ideas to fruition.
The Wapo recently wrote an article about how Rhee expects to measure teacher success, which is by and large the biggest obstacle of the reform. It’s easy to say that the best teachers will be retained and the worst kicked to the curb or rehabilitated through professional development, harder to actually say which teachers are which and why.
Rhee’s new report/plan, which apparently is 200 pages (put together in part by an educational consulting firm from the District–note the copy I found online is only 50 pages…), outlines how teacher success will be measured. It touches on several aspects of the evaluation:
- new regular assessments by principals and other staff
- how many times student outbursts are permissible (in a set period of time) – good teachers have control of their classrooms
- the number of minutes that can be wasted in any 30 minute period (3. Over that and it’s obvious the teacher isn’t well prepped)
I perused the copy I found online and found the insights and directives incredibly easy to follow (honestly, from reading the document I think ANYONE could be a better teacher). It’s succinct, easy to digest and reads like a “how to” instead of a “do this or else”. In fact, the document clearly outlines expectations, how one might accomplish them and “what excellence looks like”. What else could a teacher ask for?
But if I were just getting my info. from the Wapo article and I were a DC teacher I might be shaking in my booties. It doesn’t paint a very favorable (in my opinion) picture of the reforms that will affect measuring teacher success. It’s more of a punch list of changes, including the fact that the number of students is increasing at the same time these new criteria are being imposed.
The situation in DC is a challenge in the simplest sense of the word. That being said, I would also be thinking to myself that measuring these new criteria is a MONUMENTAL task: possibly involving huge amounts of qualitative observation and coding (just like the kind I did as a student in Graduate School at Syracuse University) in order to get a handle on whether or not the teachers are meeting expectations.
I’ll be watching this unfold in interest.
“D.C. Public Schools Teaching and Learning Framework,”
Aside from the assessment of teacher quality and effectiveness, I think that some really great changes were also highlighted by the Wapo and these come in the form of disciplinary revisions. At least some of the anecdotal evidence of educational reform concedes that setting up the right culture for learning can have a positive influence on student achievement (and maybe even teacher effectiveness), just look at KIPP. The revisions specifically target for what and when students can be suspended for.
BEFORE: students could be suspended for simple dress code violations
AFTER: students can only be suspended for situations like cheating, bullying and other such violations
The old code permitted suspension for such an array of offenses that the punishment lost any real meaning, officials said. Principals were allowed to send students home for dress code violations, which is not permitted under the new rules.
According to the most recent available data, suspensions grew from 1,303 in 2006 to 2,245 in 2008 — a 72 percent increase. School officials say that removing students from school only puts them behind in class and can lead to truancy and trouble with the justice system. (from page 2)
Let’s hope that the superficial, cultural changes like that above can make a huge difference so that districts aren’t forced to hire observers to code their every classroom activity/action.