Combining growth in students’ test scores, student feedback and classroom observations produces accurate information on teacher effectiveness, according to Gates Foundation research.
A composite measure on teacher effectiveness drawing on all three of those measures, and tested through a random-assignment experiment, predicted fairly accurately how much high-performing teachers would successfully boost their students’ standardized-test scores, concludes the series of new papers, part of the massive Measures of Effective Teaching study launched three years ago.
No more than half of a teacher’s evaluation should be on growth in student achievement, researchers concluded. In addition, teachers’ classroom performance should be observed by more than one person.
Of course, the controversy on how to evaluate teachers — and what to do with the information — is not over.
The ever-increasing federal role in education makes no sense, writes Marc Tucker, who complains that U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan is forcing states to evaluate teachers based on student performance in order to get No Child Left Behind waivers. Most researchers don’t think value-added measures of teacher performance are reliable, writes Tucker.
The study is a “political document and not a research document,” Jay Greene tells the Wall Street Journal. Classroom observations aren’t a strong predictor of student performance says Greene, a professor of education policy at the University of Arkansas. “But the Gates Foundation knows that teachers and others are resistant to a system that is based too heavily on student test scores, so they combined them with other measures to find something that was more agreeable to them,” he said.