I had an outstanding student teacher this year. It was a positive experience for both of us: some lucky school in our area will be very fortunate to have her as their new science teacher. Hard working, enthusiastic, and knowledgeable, she makes the future of the teaching profession look bright!
We don't often get student teachers in our school because of our relatively rural location somewhat distant from college or university teacher education programs. When we do get student teachers, they frequently are completing online certification programs. For prospective teachers in rural areas, or for those who move during their education or need to continue working to support themselves, online learning is often the only option. My student teacher completed an accredited online program with a strong presence in our state.
My student teacher excelled in the classroom. Her clinical supervisor, a retired teacher from our area, provided helpful and supportive feedback, and was definitely an asset to the student teacher's development. The online program's student teacher evaluation system, however? More than a little funky.
As a mentor teacher, one of my duties was to fill out a mid term and final evaluation, using a form provided by her teacher evaluation program. I had to rate her 1 to 4 on a number of indicators. Here's a few of the rating indicators:
"Does not use filler words that distract listeners: Avoids words such as: like, um, well, you-know, etc."
While this is important, it reminded me of the rubric we use at our
high school for senior project presentations, which doesn't seem
appropriate for a rubric which is used for the purposes of teacher
certification.
"Hairstyles are conservative. Free from offensive body odor, washes hair frequently." Well, who am I to judge the conservativeness of a student teacher's hair cut? Also, if you miss a day of hair washing, how much does that lower your numerical score?
"Willing to use "personal time" to meet professional responsibilities." Notice how the teacher education program placed "personal time" in quotations–what does that mean? Yes, teachers use a lot of personal time to meet professional responsibilities–that can be a hot issue. Stating this as an indicator on which a student teacher will be rated 1-4 really sets up the expectation early on that a teacher's time is not their own. What does a 4, "exceeds expected competency," mean when the indicator is willingness to use personal time for professional responsibilities?
"Cooperative. Does not complain constantly." I'm all for positive attitude, but "does not complain constantly" seems like a pretty negative way to describe it.
"Does not tell inappropriate jokes." Right there at the end, there was that indicator, asking me to rate it 1-4. Well, at that point of filling out the evaluation form, I was the one who wanted to tell an inappropriate joke–and I was prepared to exceed expected competency in this area.
I also had to complete an online training program for working with a student teacher. This program's written materials advised me to say things to the student teacher like, “At the beginning of every lesson I want you to state the objective. You will say it the same way each time. ‘By the end of today’s lesson you will know _______________.’ ” Hey, nothing like robotic communication of learning targets! I was offered a "printable certificate" for completing this online training, but I opted not to press print. The materials also stated, "Very few students fail [our student teaching program]."
What seemed to be downplayed in this student teacher evaluation form? Well–teaching competencies. To be fair, teaching competencies were mentioned, but overall, the evaluation rubric was dominated by indicators relating to attitude, personal traits, and general social/communication skills. While these are, of course, extremely important, they are not specific to teaching. A person could excel at all of these and still be a poor teacher.
There's a lot of teaching rubrics receiving a lot of attention in Washington state right now–the three TPEP instructional frameworks, all the National Board certificate area standards. These are all pretty good, and they have a lot of similarities–they are based on a lot of the same research. They focus on classroom instruction and other professional practices. This student teacher evaluation rubric did not resemble those other instructional frameworks or standards in any way!
We've discussed "raising the bar" and teacher education programs on this blog before. With evaluation rubrics like these still in existence for pre-service teachers, it really might be time for some reform.
When I go on site visits with NCATE (the accreditation council for teacher ed schools) we look at a lot of rubrics for student teachers and clinical experiences.
Never have I seen anything as stupid as the rubrics you’ve shared in this post. And I’ll tell you this: if we were to come across crap like that, that college would have some problems to solve, or risk losing their accreditation.
Seems like it’s time for some coordination between our state certification people and some of these institutions that certify teachers. Seriously, this is ridiculous! Some of these student teachers, after spending significant time and money on their programs, will have no clue what they will need to be doing to meet the State criteria for evaluations and certification. Something definitely wrong with this picture!
Those are so weird. I’ve seen the professional attire and behavior component on evaluations for my student teacher, but more emphasis – regardless of the institution – was placed on pedagogy, cultural competency, and content mastery. Maybe this program emphasized these things so much because they had no physical contact with their students?
I have always made it a priority to teach my student teachers the importance of being efficient in grading and planning. More than once, I’ve told an overwhelmed student teacher to take that stack of student work and put it in the recycle bin, or pass it back for a day of peer commentary (which is also efficient planning!).
As a working mom I have learned to do a great job in the classroom while almost totally working the “contract day.” It really burns me up when there is an expectation, spoken or otherwise, that a teacher needs to be willing to put in extra time. It’s not necessary to do that. Given that a student teacher is paying for the experience of working full time, I would say every student teacher exceeds expectation in the category of using personal time to meet professional responsibilities!
First of all, I am glad you don’t have to do a similar evaluation for your colleagues. I do try to bathe and what hair I have I try to keep clean. And never will you hear an inappropriate comment, let alone joke from me. But I agree with you about the use of personal time. It isn’t exactly personal anymore is it? So what it really means is that an underpaid beginning teacher who is already busting their behinds is not only expected to do one of the most demanding and difficult jobs there is, but should also feel guilty about it if they don’t put their job above family, friends, and maybe even that second job they need to make ends meet. The thinking that led to that evaluation criteria is the reason teachers need the strength and protection of a union.
The first few are laughable but innocuous… maybe a decent first screen for unprofessionalism. I think the “Exceeds” level for “uses personal time” must somehow involve the capacity to work in 28 or 32 hour days rather than the mere 24 hour days the “Meets” level would be capable of.
But. The part that gets me most is the robo-teach you mention. Stating the objective/target in exactly the same way every single day? Does that mean every lesson is the same? Goodness, I hope my kid doesn’t end up on that assembly line.