Teaching Skill Is Subjective, Not Easily Measurable

(Jerry Heverly is a public school teacher in San Leandro.)

Last weekend I attended a symposium in San Jose about California schools that featured a panel discussion about teacher evaluations.

Statistical evaluations, using state tests, are sweeping the nation. But California has mostly escaped this trend, probably because the teachers’ union is so politically powerful.

There were five people on the panel but only one who favored using test data to rank teachers. Fortunately this speaker—Tim Melton, Vice President of StudentsFirst, Michele Rhee’s organization—was articulate and passionate.

Without him it would have been a very dull preaching-to-the-choir session.

 “We know who the good teachers are!” sayeth Mr. Melton. It was his best moment. He gesticulated and almost bounced out of his seat.

“The students know who the good teachers are, the administrators know, the parents know, the janitor knows.” You could see the other panelists squirm as Melton exuded self-assurance and certainty. He had no doubts that he knew the truth about teaching.

The key assumption of reformers like StudentsFirst is that there are boatloads of incompetent teachers hiding behind union protections.

 It ain’t that hard to tell a good teacher. And, more importantly, we know who the bad teachers are. That’s the reformer mantra.

The mission of Michele Rhee and Teach for America, and charter operators like the KIPP schools is to get rid of the slackers and put a highly-qualified teacher in every classroom. (Read about the KIPP schools in San Lorenzo in the Patch archives.)

Who could dispute such a goal, especially when they talk of the racial injustice of the current system.

Look at any inner city and you’ll find inexperienced teachers supervising the most disadvantaged kids.

But I’d like to argue that the janitor doesn’t know the good teachers, nor do the parents or any other of Melton’s observers.

I don’t believe there is any objective way to evaluate a teacher.

I have to assume that there are many readers of this column who have been evaluated by a superior on your job.

Your experience of your own evaluation should be my most powerful evidence that this kind of thing doesn’t work.

It won’t work because teaching is partially an art.

It won’t work because there are a thousand qualities that go into making a teacher, qualities that are do diverse and so numerous that no human being could possibly produce a number to summarize an individual teacher.

 Everyone remembers their favorite teacher and everyone is certain that good and bad teachers (if there are such) are as easy to spot as the Pacific Ocean from the Marina.

I don’t think you can.

Teacher A is hell on wheels when it comes to helping an immigrant kid master algebra. But he can’t teach his way out of a paper bag when it comes to gifted students. And his grading system is incomprehensible.

Teacher B has no classroom management skills.  But he is an inspiring tennis coach and he works his butt off trying to tutor kids after school.

Teacher C produces the best test scores in the building. But he has such an obnoxious personality that he creates massive personnel problems.

The panelist who followed Mr. Melton was Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan of Alamo.

Assemblywoman Buchanan told the story of her twin sons. Both had the same high school history teacher. For one this teacher was an incompetent quack, for the other he was his favorite teacher.

I know how infuriating this is, how I seem to be defending the status quo, preventing agents of change from threshing out the bad teachers.

Next week I hope to show some realistic (and some unrealistic) measures that might be attractive even to those who can’t wait to use test scores to clean house.

You can read more essays like this in the archives of Entirely Secondary.