Many AFT locals pilot teacher evaluations based on union framework

American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten recently talked about the union’s leadership role  on one of the education reforms getting the most attention of late: teacher evaluations. The union has developed an evaluation framework and has worked with more than 50 AFT locals to put it in place. A few of them, like Pittsburgh, PA, New Haven, CT, and Cleveland, OH, have made the evaluation framework a central part of their newly developed teacher contracts.

According to AFT’s document A Continuous Improvement Model for Teacher Evaluation , “…teacher evaluation procedures are broken—cursory, perfunctory, superficial, and inconsistent.” But that doesn’t mean they are inconsequential. They are used to make critical decisions ranging from continued employment in a district to eligibility for incentive or bonus pay. They are seldom a useful tool in improving teacher performance.

The union calls for “regular, rigorous reviews by trained evaluators, including peers and principals, based on professional teaching standards, best practices and student achievement. The goal is to improve public education by helping promising teachers improve, enabling good teachers to become great, and identifying those teachers who shouldn’t be in the classroom at all.”

AFT’s evaluation model outlines the union’s principles for effective teacher development and evaluation, and as reported here earlier, student test scores are included as one measure of teacher performance. The model states, “Student test scores based on valid assessments should be one of the performance criteria, as should classroom observations, portfolio reviews, appraisal of lesson plans and student work.”

AFT’s framework includes these teacher development and evaluation components:

• Professional teaching standards. The union contends that each state should have professional teaching standards for districts to use as the basis for their teacher evaluations. The standards should spell out what teachers should know and be able to do, like those put forth by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
• Standards for assessing teacher practice. To assess how well teachers meet professional standards, evaluators should use multiple measures to gauge teacher effectiveness: classroom observations, lesson plans, portfolios, and student test scores.
• Implementation standards. The union calls for spelling out the basics of an evaluation system: how teachers are involved, who evaluates them and how often, what criteria will be considered, and how the results will be used.
• Standards for teaching and learning conditions. School conditions including teachers’ time, facilities and resources, teacher empowerment, school leadership, opportunities for training, school climate, and safety all play a part in how conducive to learning a school is and should be assessed regularly.
• Standards for systems of support. Programs to support teacher professional development should be provided to all teachers throughout their careers and particularly to those who need support to improve.
• Accountability. When districts have a valid system of teacher evaluation and development, they can then formulate a fair process for teacher advancement and dismissal of teachers who fail to improve.

AFT notes that its role in developing more rigorous teacher evaluations—including the use of student test scores—may come as a surprise to some, but teachers as well as students benefit when they are surrounded by well-prepared and supported colleagues.

—“AFT Chief Talks Teacher Evaluation,” by Stephen Sawchuk, Education Week’s Teacher Beat blog, July 9, 2010.