Your Evaluation Form

Evaluation necessarily results in ranking performance on some continuum or scale. Typically, teacher and administrators are outstanding, satisfactory, unsatisfactory or they need improvement.

It's the needs improvement category that will need your attention. Whatever its original intent was, needs improvement quickly became a kind of general warning that performance should improve, but also a convenient way to avoid the rigors of ending someone's employment. Unions have used it effectively for that purpose, as have administrators. Whether anyone actually improves varies widely from district to district and school to school.

Eliminate needs improvement. One academic year is sufficient to determine the future employment status of a beginning teacher. Consulting teachers are, after all, human, and it is too temping to postpone a contract nonrenewal recommendation by marking needs improvement.

Make a decision. That's why we use two semesters, not four. Evaluators, regardless of who they are, will tend to use all of the time allotted to face up to an unpleasant experience. Two semesters are enough in virtually every case. In those rare instances when a third semester is approved, it is the PAR panel that decides.

There are many different evaluation forms in use, and yours is probably as good a place to start as any. In our case, we eliminated needs improvement and stated the standards then represent what we expected as basic competent practice.

As we gained more experience, it was evident that we needed to be more specific about the contractual status of the teacher.

That had not always been the case under the old system, and it resulted in unnecessary conflicts about a teacher's contractual status.

Toledo's evaluation form is only a guide. Be aware that consulting teachers present written narratives for each of the four overall rating categories. Principals are required to have narratives only for "outstanding" and "unsatisfactory" during their second-year evaluations. The same form is used both years.

After the two-year probationary period, Toledo does not evaluate annually. Teachers who hold multi-year contracts, but do not qualify for tenure, are evaluated by principals every four years. If there is a problem, a consulting teacher also is sent by the PAR panel to evaluate and report back to the panel. This is a practice that we implemented after our program started because we found it to be more effective than automatically relying on what was sent in from the school.

Teachers with continuing contracts (tenure in Ohio) are not evaluated at all. That practice should provoke some discussion. Intervention, or mandatory mentoring, is used instead. Four-year contract teachers are subject to intervention and mentoring, also. The "pat on the back" rationale often heard in defense of annual evaluations usually ends up being just that, so we scratch where it itches. The point is that an honest look at your current evaluation practices is probably overdue, not only for first-year teacher, but for veterans as well.

You might not want to go this far with peer review, but note that while we avoid perfunctory annual evaluations, we take our performance standards seriously. Among the contract nonrenewals has been the spouse of one of the union's officers, and the spouse of one of the management members of the panel. We make no allowances for friends or relatives or for those who lobby in their behalf. Statistical Report of Intern Teachers Denied Further Employment.