Written by guest blogger Amanda Frasier.
As long as there have been people teaching, there have been people trying to hold teachers accountable for something. Current generations of teacher evaluation policy rely on the assumption that evaluating teachers will: 1. Motivate teachers to do a good job and/or 2. Provide feedback that allows teachers to make changes to their practice. In both cases, it is assumed that the changes a teacher makes to their practice will be for the better.
However, it is important to note that all types of assessment, which include formalized evaluations of teaching, are inherently value-laden. Assessment defines what is valued in something and defines what is the right and wrong of that thing, as well as multiple shades of in-between. Moreover, assessment encourages people to change behaviour to accommodate those values. Sometimes, those behaviour changes occur in unexpected or unintended ways. For instance, in the field of education we have seen assessment led to a narrowing of curriculum, among other negative consequences.
Recently, I published a paper in the Journal of Education Human Resources investigating how teacher perceptions of an evaluation policy’s influence on their practice differed based on individual tenure status. My study found that untenured teachers, who were early in their career, were more likely to report perceptions of changing their practice due to evaluation, and some of these changes are linked to potentially negative consequences.
In reality, a new teacher’s experience with value-laden assessments goes far beyond formalized teacher evaluation policies. For instance, educator preparation programs (EPPs) are structured to give candidates a variety of theoretical, pedagogical, content, and practical knowledge through work in both courses and the field. Students are in turn, assessed within those courses. And while requirements do vary slightly from state to state, EPPs must accomplish the goals and requirements set forth by their accrediting bodies and state legislatures to credential teachers, which also assess these programs. Simultaneously, teaching candidates must pass a variety of assessments including content knowledge exams and/or performance-based portfolios. These pre-service experiences are inherently value-laden due the layers of evaluation and assessment that occur within the process of educator preparation. Importantly, the values that drive all of these assessments are often at odds with one another.
New teachers then enter the field where they are faced with another set of contending values driven largely by assessments. For instance, in most United States contexts, teachers must meet certain state mandated curriculum standards which are then evaluated by standardized testing. Additionally, many schools have achieved compliance with state requirements for curriculum by purchasing scripted programs which promise to meet state standards and prepare students for high stakes assessments, and some schools evaluate their teachers based on adherence to such prescribed curriculums.
Assessment is important, but I propose it is also worthwhile to simultaneously examine systems of assessment to identify what values are driving these instruments and how those values are changing behaviour, particularly among new teachers who are formulating their practice in the context of multiple, and competing, assessment values.
AMANDA SLATEN FRASIER is an assistant professor of Curriculum and Instruction at East Tennessee State University. She is a National Board Certified Teacher and holds a PhD . in Educational Policy from Michigan State University. She has previously worked as a secondary English and Social Studies teacher and as a K-8 school librarian. Her research interests include educational policy and governance, teacher development and preparation, and assessment.
“Do High School Teachers Alter Classroom Practice Due to Evaluation? Evidence from North Carolina’s Career Status and Teacher Evaluation Policies” was published in the Journal of Education Human Resources 41.2 and is Free to Read until August 30th.
Comments on this entry are closed.