Let’s get
serious about nationwide teacher evaluations
Anita Lie ; A Professor at Widya
Mandala Catholic University, Surabaya
JAKARTA
POST, 11 Agustus 2012
While the nationwide teacher
competence test has been poorly administered, removing the test and trusting
teachers, as suggested by Setiono Sugiharto (The Jakarta Post, Aug. 4, 2012)
may mean overestimating our teachers’ capability to take command of their
teaching quality and enhance their professional development.
It is true that some teachers are highly committed and dedicated to their profession. Such teachers are intrinsically driven to be engaged in the continuous improvement of their teaching practices and student learning. Those teachers would be misrepresented in an inappropriately designed and poorly administered competence test. A multiple-choice format competence test would not be adequate to assess and reveal the merits of those teachers.
Without any proper teacher-evaluation system however, performance assessment and professional learning will be neglected. Good teachers will likely improve their skills, but mediocre and poor teachers will continue their bad habits and will do no good for our students. An effective teacher evaluation system should have a clearly-defined purpose, set appropriate priorities and be wedded to a comprehensive approach.
The competence test was launched and was said to map the quality of teachers nationwide, review the quality of all certified teachers and justify extra pay on a quarterly basis. All these objectives have marred and confused the purpose of teacher assessment.
To map the quality of teachers should not require that all teachers be tested. An appropriate sampling should be adequate and more than efficient.
Justifying additional pay for teachers may be part of the political process between the Education and Culture Ministry and the House of Representatives. Thus, it should not be resolved by administering such a large-scale test. Should the competence test really aim to review the quality of certified teachers, further questions will arise.
To what end does the competence test lead teachers? Is the goal to promote student learning or merely to review teachers’ quality? What aspects of high-quality teaching does it assess?
Any program or activity in the education system should eventually aim at promoting student learning. Scoring high on the multiple choice test does not directly translate into improved teacher practices and student learning. When the education system clearly and consistently pursues assessment and growth for every teacher, teachers will stay focused on their own growth as well as that of their students.
An effective teacher-performance-assessment system includes continuous professional development, peer coaching, principal involvement and leadership at the school level.
At the end of the day, a serious teacher evaluation system requires the authority to take tough decisions in relation to rewarding the good teachers, improving the not-so-good teachers or dismissing the bad ones. This system is founded on the assumption that “all teachers can and want to learn” until on a case-by-case basis, some teachers prove unwilling or unable to do so.
Should the teacher assessment really aim at promoting student learning, it requires a comprehensive approach. Improving teachers’ qualities, which then leads to student learning, goes beyond the results of multiple-choice competence tests.
The growth of teachers needs to be assessed on a day-to-day basis. This means principals have to systematically conduct their supervision responsibility. While the official supervisors at the district education level rarely perform their duties properly, few principals carry out the classroom observation tasks or design a system of mentoring, peer-observation and supervision in their schools. Consequently, few school leaders have developed adequate supervision skills and thus teachers are left to sink or swim throughout their teaching careers.
A nation that is serious about improving the learning of its children should start by appointing education executives who are consistent enough to make teacher’s growth one of the highest priorities of education development.
The recent teachers’ competence test may be positively regarded as a good start in enhancing teachers’ growth, but unfortunately the test remains far from an appropriately designed model of teacher evaluation. To enhance student learning, more thought and effort should be integrated into an effective teacher performance assessment system. ●
It is true that some teachers are highly committed and dedicated to their profession. Such teachers are intrinsically driven to be engaged in the continuous improvement of their teaching practices and student learning. Those teachers would be misrepresented in an inappropriately designed and poorly administered competence test. A multiple-choice format competence test would not be adequate to assess and reveal the merits of those teachers.
Without any proper teacher-evaluation system however, performance assessment and professional learning will be neglected. Good teachers will likely improve their skills, but mediocre and poor teachers will continue their bad habits and will do no good for our students. An effective teacher evaluation system should have a clearly-defined purpose, set appropriate priorities and be wedded to a comprehensive approach.
The competence test was launched and was said to map the quality of teachers nationwide, review the quality of all certified teachers and justify extra pay on a quarterly basis. All these objectives have marred and confused the purpose of teacher assessment.
To map the quality of teachers should not require that all teachers be tested. An appropriate sampling should be adequate and more than efficient.
Justifying additional pay for teachers may be part of the political process between the Education and Culture Ministry and the House of Representatives. Thus, it should not be resolved by administering such a large-scale test. Should the competence test really aim to review the quality of certified teachers, further questions will arise.
To what end does the competence test lead teachers? Is the goal to promote student learning or merely to review teachers’ quality? What aspects of high-quality teaching does it assess?
Any program or activity in the education system should eventually aim at promoting student learning. Scoring high on the multiple choice test does not directly translate into improved teacher practices and student learning. When the education system clearly and consistently pursues assessment and growth for every teacher, teachers will stay focused on their own growth as well as that of their students.
An effective teacher-performance-assessment system includes continuous professional development, peer coaching, principal involvement and leadership at the school level.
At the end of the day, a serious teacher evaluation system requires the authority to take tough decisions in relation to rewarding the good teachers, improving the not-so-good teachers or dismissing the bad ones. This system is founded on the assumption that “all teachers can and want to learn” until on a case-by-case basis, some teachers prove unwilling or unable to do so.
Should the teacher assessment really aim at promoting student learning, it requires a comprehensive approach. Improving teachers’ qualities, which then leads to student learning, goes beyond the results of multiple-choice competence tests.
The growth of teachers needs to be assessed on a day-to-day basis. This means principals have to systematically conduct their supervision responsibility. While the official supervisors at the district education level rarely perform their duties properly, few principals carry out the classroom observation tasks or design a system of mentoring, peer-observation and supervision in their schools. Consequently, few school leaders have developed adequate supervision skills and thus teachers are left to sink or swim throughout their teaching careers.
A nation that is serious about improving the learning of its children should start by appointing education executives who are consistent enough to make teacher’s growth one of the highest priorities of education development.
The recent teachers’ competence test may be positively regarded as a good start in enhancing teachers’ growth, but unfortunately the test remains far from an appropriately designed model of teacher evaluation. To enhance student learning, more thought and effort should be integrated into an effective teacher performance assessment system. ●
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar