Teacher performance is one of those topics that comes up from time to time. Why? I believe that this is the case because it is still one of the few professions (some people are still debating whether it is a profession) where as a general rule performance appraisal has still not be adequately designed or implemented. Why not would be the next question? Many, in particular unions have fought strongly for a complete absence of performance appraisals stating it would not be fair or reliable. Is that a reasonable excuse, even if it is slightly true? The real conflict starts with the fact that basically to do an effective appraisal you would need three key pieces of information. Supervisor report, student feedback and results (passes, competent students etc). Any form of appraisal without at least those three forms of evidence would be invalid and unreliable. This is where the tension starts (see diagram above). For example can you say that if a teacher has a predominance of low scores in a class that it has anything to do with their performance? Maybe the students are of a low ability. Maybe the assessment is difficult and high scores are unlikely. Maybe the content is not what students would like to do but it is part of a compulsory unit of study. Due to some of these factors student feedback of the teacher is low as well. This teacher now has a performance which on paper looks very poor. Take another teacher who takes a class of very intelligent, well off students with a very flexible assessment strategy and with content that is stimulating and interesting. The students get high scores and student feedback is good. The teacher’s performance is on paper high. If we looked at both teachers objectively their skill, knowledge, experience and professional capability could be the same. In fact the poor performer from above could be a better teacher but tensions/forces outside of their control have influenced the result. Is there anything we can do about this? Is there a better way of assessing a teachers performance? I am not sure. If remuneration is then based on a performance appraisal system then we really are going to see some conflict and heated debate. This also goes for trainers, lecturers, assessors and coaches.
Personally I have two views. I am a teacher in the public education system and in that system I don’t care about the money. I do it because I want to and the student achievement (learning) is my reward. Don’t cloud the system with performance based pay as it doesn’t work (see above). Student feedback here is for my self development and enables me to understand my strengths and weaknesses and hence I encourage it and use it.
I work in the private sector and their my performance and the results I achieve are directly controlled by me (generally ie I write the program, people are selected for the programs who need it and want it etc) . I am paid for this and hence, even though I still get a lot of satisfaction from participants learning I expect to be paid for my abilities and experience. If a client wants to pay me based on feedback, fine as they are the client and I must meet their requirements. Often there is no assessment and content is under my control so learning and an entertaining session is reasonably easy to achieve. I also get paid a lot more here than the public education sector.
I know we have had this debate now for many years (ever since I became a teacher) but it is also a hot topic across the world of teaching (read this article). I was intrigued by this website that details four websites where you can rate teachers and lecturers. I should have known this would be out there but I didn’t think of it. Is this a good idea? Can we get spiteful students (those who failed) seeding this websites? What do you think about this topic? Is your performance as a teacher/trainer reviewed? Are you paid accordingly? Would you like to see your name on one of these teacher rating websites? Interesting questions.
Leave a Reply