How should teachers be tested for quality? This is a question being mulled by education systems across the world as governments strive to lift their country’s performance on international league tables.
While the goal – high quality teachers – is the same, the methods surrounding how to reach this goal differ widely from system to system.
In the United States, numerous surveys have asked teachers to weigh in on the topic of how teachers should be tested, and for the most part, they all shared the same answer: a rigorous evaluation process.
They believe a well-designed process can help them improve at their jobs and will ultimately benefit students. However, teachers believe any evaluation process should be fair, consistently applied, and take into account the realities of their profession.
A study by Eva Baker and Paul Barton (et al) from the Economic Policy Institute, said that as is the case in every profession that requires complex practice and judgments, “precision and perfection in the evaluation of teachers will never be possible.”
“Evaluators may find it useful to take student test score information into account in their evaluations of teachers, provided such information is embedded in a more comprehensive approach,” the researchers said.
“What is now necessary is a comprehensive system that gives teachers the guidance and feedback, supportive leadership, and working conditions to improve their performance.”
This, they say, permits schools to remove persistently ineffective teachers without distorting the entire instructional program by imposing “a flawed system” of standardised quantification of teacher quality.
Melissa Barnes, a lecturer in the Faculty of Education at Monash University, and Russell Cross, an associate professor in the Melbourne Graduate School of Education at the University of Melbourne, recently looked into this topic in an Australian context.
They question the relevance and effectiveness of the Literacy and Numeracy Test for Initial Teacher Education (LANTITE) – a government-led initiative to improve teacher quality in Australian schools.
LANTITE requires teacher education students to reach a certain level of literacy and numeracy before graduating.
“Those who are advocating for LANTITE claim it provides an effective way to select and attract high-quality candidates to teacher education and into the profession. However, the relevance of the LANTITE needs to be further interrogated,” they said.
“This is especially true when the cost of this exam is placed primarily on the shoulders of those we’re attempting to recruit into teaching without any clear cost-benefit in return.”
According to renowned education expert, Linda Darling-Hammond, Finland has honed in on this cost-benefit by providing its teachers with what they need most to provide students with a quality education – trust and flexibility.
“Professional teachers should have space for innovation, because they should try to find new ways to improve learning,” Darling-Hammond said in her report, titled: ‘Steady Work: How Finland Is Building a Strong Teaching and Learning System’.
“Teachers should not be seen as technicians whose work is to implement strictly dictated syllabi, but rather as professionals who know how to improve learning for all.”
She said all this creates a significant challenge that calls for changes in teacher education programs.
“Teachers are ranked highest in importance, because educational systems work through them,” she said.