Below, I will compare two different teacher evaluation programs by outlining the main components of each. The first will be the Reach Teach Evaluation model of Austin Independent School District in Austin, Texas. The second will be the IMPACT Program of the District of Colombia Public Schools. To conclude, I will propose elements on which I think teachers, specifically in Physical Education, should be judged.
At AISD, teacher performance is assessed through the use of student learning objectives (SLOs). Teachers must create two SLOs and have them approved by their principal. The goal of each SLO is for it to be achieved by 75 percent of students in a particular course. In order to measure the success of each SLO, districtwide exams have been developed to assess students at the beginning and end of each school year. Additionally, each teacher must identify how each SLO is based on students’ needs and how they align with both state and national standards. If SLOs are met by the teacher, he/she meets one of the four qualifications of a strategic compensation program that is designed to support and reward teachers based on their success in the classroom (Review of AISD, 2011).
The IMPACT program that has been deployed by District of Columbia Public Schools aims to ensure that all school-based personnel completely understand what defines excellence in their work, receive constructive and data driven feedback, and receive support needed to become more effective in their role. Included in this program is IMPACTplus which provides increased compensation for school-based staff who consistently perform at high levels. IMPACT has six primary measures of student achievement data, instructional expertise, collaboration, and professionalism. First, the Individual Value-Added Measure estimates each teacher’s impact on student learning. Second, the Teacher-Assessed Student Achievement Data measures the student learning over an entire school year – specifically highlighted by the rigor of assessments. Third, the Teaching and Learning Framework is a rubric used by superiors to assess educators five times per year. Forth, the Commitment to the School Community measures how well the staff member works with their colleagues. Fifth, the School Value-Added Measure tracks school-wide student learning throughout an entire school year. Lastly, Core Professionalism measures four basic professional requirements for all staff. At the end of the school year, all school personnel are given a final rating of either ineffective, minimally effective, effective, or highly effective based on total points acquired from the above measurements (Review of DCPS, 2012).
For me, sure, both of these sounds good. However, it is a tedious process. To have someone in my class five times each school year seems extreme. However, I also see the value in this – it creates a checks and balances system where teachers must perform at a high level. In my class, the evaluation process I conduct on myself is pretty simple: do students have fun? do students understand what it means to be a good leader? and are they prepared to encounter many different types of team sports upon leaving our school and moving to America? If the answer to each of these questions is “yes,” then I feel I have done my job.
Expert Review Consensus Report 2009–10 Review of Austin Independent School District: Student Learning Objectives in Reach. (2011, January). Retrieved May 22, 2017, from http://resource.tqsource.org/evalmodel/PDFReport/Aisd_Slo_Report.pdf
Expert Review Consensus Report 2011 Review of District of Columbia Public Schools: IMPACT Program. (2012, April). Retrieved May 22, 2017, from http://resource.tqsource.org/evalmodel/PDFReport/DC_IMPACT_Report.pdf