(Columbia, MO) – According to a recent Missouri State Teachers Association survey of more than 2,500 educators across the state, opinions are split. Fifty-one percent do not believe the tool is an effective, accurate and fair method for teacher evaluations, but 49 percent do believe the tool is an effective, accurate and fair method for teacher evaluations.
Many Missouri school districts revised their evaluation systems based on the principles adopted by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. There are at least seven different evaluation models. Of the seven, no model stood out as being considerably better or worse than another.
“Where the process is working well, it is working very well and we want to support that,” MSTA Executive Director Bruce Moe said. “Where it is not working well, we need to find a way to support those teachers and districts in finding a way to better implement educator evaluations to provide meaningful and actionable feedback.”
Here are a few more key findings:
- More than 41 percent of respondents have taught for more than 15 years.
- Of the seven models: 61 percent self-reported their district is using the NEE (Network for Educator Effectiveness – developed by the University of Missouri), 17.2 percent are using DESE (Missouri Educator Evaluation System), 8.4 percent are not sure which model their district is using, 6.7 percent are using a Hybrid Model (the district developed their own evaluation system aligned with the seven Essential Principles), 2 percent are using Robert Marzano’s model and 2 percent are using TalentEd (also a DESE model).
- One of the key components of the new evaluation model is for administrators to provide specific suggestions, techniques or resources to improve instruction. Additionally, if teachers are expected to provide feedback to students to improve learning, then evaluators should be providing relevant feedback to help teachers.
- Almost 63 percent of respondents said their administrator is providing helpful feedback, but the practice is still leaving more than 37 percent of teachers without actionable steps for improvement.
“I feel like I’m getting decent positive feedback, but most everything I’ve seen is just notes about what I was doing in the class. I haven’t seen anything yet that I should improve, and I’m afraid that at the end of the year I am going to be surprised by a bunch of negatives that I didn’t realize I had.”
“They try but they are administrators who are former homeroom/math teachers who are attempting to give me feedback on how to teach art to my art students.”
Many of the respondents to the MSTA survey said they agree with the need to evaluate educators. However, they believe there is a possibility the evaluation process could make teachers worry more about the observations and unable to focus on meeting the needs of their students.
“I have never been a big fan of “walk through” evaluations. I do not think it would happen with my current administrator, but I think that teachers could receive low/bad evaluations if the administrator only sees a small portion of class. Since there is not a ‘formal’ evaluation, I feel that if an administrator wanted to dismiss a teacher they could easily use the NEE walk through model to do so.”
“The desire for a standardized measure of evaluation for teachers is revolting. The same can be said for the standardized measure of students as a mandate. Each student and teacher is an individual with flaws and strengths that should be celebrated. I stand firmly convinced that many administrators would not see my teaching actions as ‘effective.’ I am extremely lucky to be blessed with administrators who appreciate what I do.”
To see the full report, go to: http://motea.ch/2016evaluations
MSTA plans to further evaluate each response and provide an in-depth analysis. The detailed report will be compiled and shared with MSTA members, MSTA’s Education Policy Committee, our lobbyists in Jefferson City and to open dialogue with other education stakeholders.
# # #
