Practical proposals
Anastasia De Waal, 20 November 2009
Shortly after a re-opening of the debate on ‘licences to teach’, teacher quality has come to the forefront of the US education agenda.
Over the last fortnight in the States, the ways in which good teaching is a) developed and b) recognised have come under re-evaluation in the States – the former by New York State education officials, the latter by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The New York State Board of Regents is currently considering a set of recommendations to transform teacher training in the state, designed to raise both the quantity and quality of teachers. The major proposals are the expansion of certification programmes – i.e. the institutions accredited to do so – as well as a potential raising of the bar.
The format of the certification process would likely vary under the new proposals. This, it is hoped, may see teacher training in the state become more focused on teaching practice. (A move which would be strongly supported by education secretary Arne Duncan, who recently argued that teaching courses need to be much refocused on the practical.)
In terms of raising the bar, the proposal is that teachers in the state of New York be required to take more challenging content exams as well as be more closely examined on their classroom performance, having done more teaching practice during their courses. Both, the education commissioner for the state, David Steiner is arguing, are necessary for raising the quality of teaching:
‘Upwards of 90 percent of teachers pass the test for certification, they go on to course work and very, very few don’t make it through. I don’t think anybody thinks that’s the right model. It’s very focused on course work and the quality is varied.’
Meanwhile the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are investing significant sums in a research project, spread across six US cities, to evaluate and identify successful ways in which teachers are ‘managed’. Primarily, that is scrutinising how teachers are recruited, retained and ‘reviewed’. Identifying effective ways in which to evaluate teachers will, the Foundation hopes, help to facilitate good teaching if the core principles are replicated.
Each of these three aspirations – hands-on teacher training, higher expectations of teachers and effective mechanisms for assessing working teachers – is immensely important for school improvement. Both in the US and here at home.
Measuring the “quality of teaching” is a waste of time. As with doctors, lawyers and other professionals, the skills and expertise are too complex to be given a simple grade.
However, anyone working with or managing these professionals will quickly learn who knows his subject, who maintains good discipline and who can explain difficult topics.
The role of the manager is not to measure but to encourage, not to monitor but to lead.
Is anyone assessed more often that the university lecturer? At my institution, each student completes a module feedback form for every semester – about 200 a year.
Unfortunately, students are rarely willing or even able to give feedback which is objective and impartial. The result is a “student satisfaction” figure which values popularity more than quality and is rightly scorned by the lecturers.
“effective ways in which to evaluate teachers” sounds like an inspection regime. This is achieved at my institution by randomly attending any one of a week’s classes and marking against a checklist.
This arrangement inevitably antagonises staff as we all have both bad and good lessons and human nature ascribes a bad report just to bad luck. The random aspect is also surprisingly stressful.
I believe observations are potentially very valuable, but need to be positive. Give advice instead of a mark. Ask teachers to suggest a difficult class to be observed so that the advice is more useful.
To the Quality Team, I say “Stop assessing us and start encouraging us”. We will respond very differently.