Sometime in the 1980′s I applied to be a mentor teacher in my district. It was a state-financed program that required the input of other teachers as well as administrators. I was required to fill out an application and answer questions about my teaching. The application required letters of recommendation from three district educators (teachers or administrators). Next I had to be interviewed by a committee of experienced teachers from throughout the district. Finally, the members of this committee visited my classroom several times to observe lessons. I was asked to show student work and my students were interviewed as well.
I was accepted into the program and was paid a stipend for helping other teachers in addition to my regular classroom duties. Other teachers seemed to be happy for me and I don’t recall any negative feedback.

What I liked best about the evaluation was the system of checks and balances that was built into it. Because I was evaluated by a team of teachers from throughout the district (most of whom I didn’t know), there was little chance of favoritism. Also, the teachers seemed really interested in the work of my students. As most educators know, teachers are often forced to work in isolation and sometimes crave feedback from other adults.

My feeling is that teachers would welcome meaningful evaluation, but it’s very important for it to be fair (not based on the personal feelings of one administrator) and authentic (i.e. based on multiple measures of student success and teacher performance).

About twenty years ago I applied for a mentor teacher position in my district. I believe the money and the requirements came from the state level so certain procedures had to be followed. I was interviewed by a team of teachers and administrators who came to my classroom several times to observe. They asked to see student work that showed progress from September. This was the only time in my long career that I was carefully evaluated. Most of my other evaluations were perfunctory affairs that left me feeling somewhat disappointed despite all the “outstanding” marks. Some principals actually copied my evaluations from other administrators. Of course teachers know when this is done but they rarely say anything because they’re usually so relieved to have the process over with.

During my tenure I always longed for people to see how much my students had learned but no one had the time to really get to know each child in my classroom. What I suspect many teachers would like is for another teacher to come in the fall, evaluate the achievement level of each child (with formal and informal observations) and then come again in the spring to note the progress of each child. This wouldn’t have to be costly if teachers exchanged classrooms to perform evaluations.

I’m glad that President Obama and Arne Duncan are asking for the input from teachers. This is the first step towards getting the improvement that we all want. Nothing will happen without the cooperation of teachers.

I would also be interested in how to relate current teacher evaluation (and yes, I’m well aware of how controversial this topic is), with PROSPECTIVE TEACHER evaluation.

After all, I keep hearing that if we hire MORE teachers, that means we are be definition lowering our standards. I think that’s hooey, but it’s out there. From Chancellor Klein himself. As part of a rationale for keeping (non-charter) class sizes high. And somehow that barrel-dipping argument doesn’t apply to new teachers hired for charters. Go figger.

P.S. The main post had me fooled with “Building capacity…” Ah well.