Thoughts on teacher evaluation systems

My friend Sharon Thompson responded to the questions James Forman asked about the details of teacher evaluation systems:

Sharon: Teacher salaries need to be higher.  Most  teachers would agree to a merit pay system similar to what I have proposed because it would be a learning process and they would be involved through peer  reviews.  I attached a spreadsheet that lays out the plan.  Please  give me credit for this plan if you share it others.

James: Would you propose using value-added assessment, and what would you do if you were in one of the overwhelming majority of districts that don’t have the data systems to support that?

Sharon: I am a  teacher and I believe in merit pay as part of a 360 degree review  process.  Merit bonus pay should be determined by a formula that includes  observations of teaching, student test results, advising students based on parent & student survey and teacher work on committees and schoolwide initiatives.  
 
The pay scale should be a band system collapsed to 5 or 6 levels.  Teachers advance through the levels based on competency, education, and service.   Minimum of 2 years on first three levels for new teachers.  Experienced  teachers can join level 3 or 4 depending on experience.  On each level  there should be a broad range of pay.  Pay increased for service is  modest cost of living.  Merit pay becomes a bonus system that would  impact teachers the most in levels 4 to 6 which are master teachers.   Teachers can remain at level 4 for many years.  Level 4 being an  effective competent teacher contributing in several ways to the school.   This way a great teacher at 8 years level 4 can earn close to the sames as a  great teacher at level 4 with 15 years experience.  Level 5 reserved for increased responsibility coaching new teachers, chairing committees  etc.

All teachers  should be observed three times a year.  Each observation should include three observers: a peer teacher observer, department chair or assistant principal, and a principal.
 
After  each observation teachers needs to receive written feedback based on a grid that has clearly observable and demonstrated criteria.
 
James: Do you endorse what Aspire schools do, and include schoolwide measures of achievement and parent satisfaction surveys? Or would you base the merit pay solely on test scores tied to an individual teacher’s classroom?
 
Sharon: Never base a teacher’s pay solely on students’ test scores.  Test scores are not reliable.  Scandals arise and cheating is encouraged.  Student attendance impacts test scores, but teachers have no ability to guarantee the  students will be available to learn.
 
James: How much weight, if any, would you  give to the judgment of principals above and beyond standardized measures?  Would there be any appeal process for teachers who felt they had been judged unfairly?
 
Sharon: Principals  should definitely have some weight, as should parents, students, and peer teachers as well.  A complete 360-degree evaluation.
 
James: What about the areas that aren’t routinely tested? Are those teachers eligible for merit pay and, if so, who decides, and on what basis?
 
Sharon: Yes, include test scores of the subject most closely related to what the teacher teaches.  Let the teacher choose.  Ask the teachers to make connections to those subjects when they are teaching.  Music can use the math scores and make many connections.
 
 
James: Finally, if we accept, as we must, that doing this right will cost more money (not the pay itself, but the investment in the assessment tools), how much should we be willing to pay?
 
Sharon: We should be  willing to spend a lot on teacher evaluation in time and money because better teachers improve student learning and assessment of teachers is essential to helping them improve.  How can you improve teacher quality without effectively measuring it?
 
 
This last one matters a lot since smart, not-stuck-in-liberal-orthodoxy school leaders like Emily Lawson,  who are actually trying to implement merit pay, have argued that good merit pay plans are 1) costly to implement, and 2) would rank relatively low on her list of priorities for improving teacher quality.