Why Are Some Teachers Being Evaluated Using the Test Scores of Kids They Didn’t Teach?
By almost all accounts, Albuquerque, New Mexico, music instructor Nick Prior is an all-star teacher. He runs six choirs, which serve nearly 200 students at the city’s Eisenhower Middle School. His choirs have won state competitions three times, and in multiple categories. Last year, his students swept a national choir competition, earning first place in showmanship and musicianship. He won a statewide award for teaching from the New Mexico Music Educators Association in 2014.
But earlier this year, when Prior received his teacher evaluation, he was deemed “minimally effective”—earning just 33.25 points out of a possible 100 in the “student achievement” category that made up half of the document.
The reason? The “student achievement” had nothing to do with music. It was based on the state standardized test scores in reading and math of the lowest performing quarter of students in his school. Many of those students had never taken one of his classes. The other half of Prior’s rating was based on a combination of classroom observations, teacher attendance, and student and parent surveys. He scored at or above average in these areas, but not high enough to counterbalance the low student achievement rating.
Prior’s dilemma has become increasingly common. Forty-two states across the country have moved in recent years to evaluate all teachers at least in part on student test score growth, according to the National Center for Teacher Quality. But tens of thousands of teachers work with students in grades that aren’t tested (like kindergarten) or subjects in which standardized tests typically don’t exist (like art, music, and physical education).
While no official count of states or districts exists, teachers in a handful of places have been or will be judged partially based on test score results for grades or subjects they don’t teach, including in Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, and Tennessee. Officials in Nevada are even considering how they might hold support staff—like school nurses and counselors—responsible for student test results, arguing that they impact student achievement by keeping students healthy and able to learn.
The move has, predictably, drawn howls from teachers and their unions—and prompted lawsuits. In some places, it could be the final straw that discredits the whole attempt to evaluate teachers on student test scores. The debate also speaks to the ongoing tension over the changing roles of teachers in an age of heightened accountability: Are educators narrow-subject-area specialists (possibly necessitating the creation of new tests in everything from music to PE)? Or are they generalists who should all be held responsible for teaching foundational skills such as literacy and math? The experience so far suggests that the answer liesEvaluating teachers in special subjects: Is it fair to grade music and art teachers on math and reading scores?:
