The Department of Education’s 18-point overhaul of its new high-stakes, teacher-evaluation system streamlines a process that principals and teachers had decried as so time-consuming and demoralizing that it was harming the learning environment at many of Hawaii’s public schools.
Most of the changes are positive, and will free up school-level administrators to work more closely with the sliver of teachers identified as marginal or struggling. The amount of time spent observing teachers whose current evaluations peg them as effective or highly effective will be reduced at least 50 percent.
In the school year that just ended, nearly 16 percent of public school teachers were rated as highly effective, 82 percent as effective, and a mere 2 percent as marginal or unsatisfactory. Obviously, then, the administrative work load related to classroom observations will plummet.
We suspect, though, that the rating criteria should be tougher if 98 percent of the teachers are considered effective in a school district that misses the mark on many national benchmarks.
Worrisome, too, is how the revisions diminish student voices in the evaluation process, which is called the Educator Effectiveness System. Starting in the 2014-15 school year, the opinions of students in grades kindergarten through second grade won’t be sought at all through the Tripod Student Survey, and older students will fill out the survey once a year, rather than twice. Annual surveys are enough, and will reduce the administrative burden, but it’s a shame that the youngest students are excluded; the simple questions captured vital insight into how children perceive their own classroom experiences.
Even more problematic is the fact that the student surveys will no longer be a stand-alone component of the EES, affecting a teacher’s overall rating. Instead, they will serve mainly as feedback. The best teachers will internalize students’ praise and constructive criticism to improve their craft, the worst will ignore and dismiss this information. Students are the educational consumers here, and their opinions should count.
In revising the EES, the DOE was responsive to teachers and administrators throughout Hawaii’s single school district who voiced some legitimate concerns about the system, which was rolled out statewide last school year after being tested on a limited basis starting in 2011. Results from the pilots and from the 2013-14 evaluations do not appear on personnel records, but evaluations in the 2014-15 school year will set the basis for teachers’ individual raises moving forward and can affect whether individuals keep their jobs and receive tenure.
It’s worth noting that Hawaii’s EES overhaul, generally lauded by the Hawaii State Teachers Association and the Hawaii Government Employees Association, was announced the same week as a landmark court ruling came down in California. A judge there struck down that state’s tenure system, seniority rules and dismissal procedures for K-12 teachers. The judge ruled in favor of students who had sued claiming they were deprived of their constitutional right to a quality education.
The ruling has no direct impact in Hawaii, and will be appealed in California, but it is sure to embolden reformers nationwide. Frustrated by the power unions hold over state legislatures — and the HSTA and the HGEA certainly exert influence here — they look to the courts to hold educators more accountable for student learning.
Robust teacher assessments are an important way to help achieve this essential goal. Great educators improve students’ lives; there’s no doubt about that. Fair evaluation systems that put children first, without unduly burdening teachers and principals, require a careful balance. The DOE must keep the students in mind as it continues to refine the EES.
