Truth About Schools (www.truthaboutschools.org) recently
posted an article that addresses a key opportunity to measure outcomes in
public education. The article, “To
Measure What Tests Can’t, Some Schools Turn to Surveys”, found here, touched on the use of surveys as a way to complement
the use of test scores and other measures.
What I found truly interesting is the parallel between this article and
thoughts recently shared by newly appointed TEA Commissioner Mike Morath with
MEaP Advocacy advisor Bobby J Rigues and me relating to the five indices used
to evaluate a teacher’s performance. His
thought is that up to 15% of the teacher’s performance assessment would be
based on student input, so the approach certainly is being discussed. And why shouldn’t student input be a part of
the framework for evaluation?
The article highlighted a
waiver granted by the Department of Education to nine of the largest school
districts in the State of California.
Under this waiver, 60% of the evaluation of the districts is tied to
traditional academic assessments, with 40% tied to a number of other factors,
including absenteeism, suspension and expulsion rates. But they didn’t stop there. They also decided to look at, and survey,
four other attributes: growth mindset, self-efficacy, self-management and
social awareness. In short they wanted
to better understand how the students perceive education and to encourage them
to be accountable for their individual learning.
It’s not my intent here to simply report on the article but I believe that those of us involved
in advocacy for public education need to seek insights from others on what we
must do to practice continuous improvement in our public education system. Asking those who are most impacted, namely
the students, is one way to help us Make
Education a Priority.
Legislation passed in Texas over the past two legislative
sessions has altered the landscape of accountability and how we measure success. Beginning in 2013 with passage of House Bill
5, legislation that first introduced a community engagement element, districts
were tasked with defining metrics by which the public that they serve could
have input on the activities and direction of the district. HB 2804, passed in the 2015 session, now
assigns 10% of the overall accountability rating to the community engagement
element. This can only be a positive as
we go forward and help set the direction of an individual district based on a
strategic plan (if one exists) complemented by giving the community the
opportunity to weigh in on the evolution of accountability in their district.
No comments:
Post a Comment