Los Angeles Experiments with a New Teacher-Evaluation System

In this Kappan article, Katharine Strunk and Tracey Weinstein (University of Southern California), Reino Makkonen (WestEd), and Drew Furedi (Los Angeles Unified School District) share the lessons they learned piloting a new teacher-evaluation plan in the Los Angeles Unified School District during the 2011-12 school year. The experiment included:

• Teacher self-assessments and lesson planning;
• Classroom observations by school-based administrators and external observers;
• An observation protocol adapted from Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching;
• Pre- and post-observation conferences with teachers;
• An online platform for teachers and observers to report notes and ratings;
• Feedback surveys of students and parents;
• Value-added measures at the teacher, grade/subject, and schoolwide level.

As these were piloted in a number of schools and departments, the research team gathered reactions from teachers, administrators, and focus groups. Here’s what they found:

• 60 percent of teachers and 77 percent of administrators said the plan would be an improvement over the existing teacher-evaluation system, and most said they were glad they had participated in the pilot. “I was encouraged to look at my own practice and set goals for myself,” said one teacher. “I felt like I had a particularly effective year, because of my participation…”

• However, many administrators and teachers said the workload involved in the new system was unmanageable. 

• There were also concerns about the lack of shared values and a common vision of what good teaching looks like, as well as administrators’ variable expertise in observing instruction (extensive training is going on during the 2012-13 school year).

• Serious budget cuts across California and LAUSD put a crimp in some of the plans, especially the ability of hard-pressed administrators to get into classrooms. 

• The teachers’ union took the position that the proposed changes in teacher evaluation could not be implemented until they were negotiated and told teachers not to participate.

• A pending court case (Jane Doe et al. v. John Deasy et al.) raised questions about how test scores should be used to evaluate teachers. 

• There were problems with the online teacher-evaluation system, including entries being deleted and server crashes.

• There were communication glitches on the timing and intent of the new policies.

• The link to professional development was not “built up” and communicated to teachers as the program was implemented. 

Strunk, Weinstein, Makkonen, and Furedi say the district has learned from these difficulties and is glad it is proceeding slowly before fully implementing the plan.

“Lessons Learned” by Katharine Strunk, Tracey Weinstein, Reino Makkonen, and Drew Furedi in Phi Delta Kappan, November 2012 (Vol. 94, #3, p. 24-28), http://www.kappanmagazine.org; Strunk can be reached at kstrunk@usc.edu. 

From the Marshall Memo #461