Teaching, as anyone who has ever been a teacher or a student knows, is a hybrid process, one not given easily to outcome quantification. So many variables. The classroom is not a widget shop.
And yet, kids, involved parents, fellow teachers, police resource officers, guidance counselors, administrators and probably school bus drivers and cafeteria personnel can tell you who the good teachers are. It’s that obvious; it’s that acknowledged. They’re tough; they’re demanding; they’re fair; they’re consistent; they’re funny; they’re creative; they’re spontaneous and they’re relevant and respected. Dedication is a given. Their reputations precede them. Class to class, year to year.
Everybody also knows who’s ineffective because they’re boring or discipline-challenged. They know who’s been using the same lesson plan from a generation ago. They also know who’s frazzled and hopes to escape to guidance counseling or administration.
I trust the county’s $200-million partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will validate these real-world verities through its various assessment and accountability tools. But I confess to being particularly skeptical of the district’s plan to hire a consultant whose job will be to measure the year-to-year, “value-added” contribution of every teacher to every student.
“We need formulas for every teacher of every subject,” explains David Steele, Hillsborough’s chief information and technology officer who has now added the title of project director, Empowering Effective Teachers Grant.
There’s value, to be sure, in fairly assessing teacher effectiveness and rewarding accordingly. Teachers and students deserve no less. But there’s also value in knowing what doesn’t lend itself to formulaic quantification. Anyone not think making a difference in a kid’s life is, by definition, rife with subjectivity? Anyone not think coming up short may be attributable to factors beyond the teacher’s control? Anyone not think this might be a formula for formula’s sake?