The National Council on Teacher Quality has a state-by-state evaluation of teacher evaluations. Their analysis flunks Virginia’s implementation of the (statutory) requirement for use of objective measures of student growth as part of the teacher evaluation system.
(Note citation to Vermont).
In fact, that understates the weakness of the Virginia system.
The Virginia requirement in Va. Code § 22.1-253.13:5 is
Evaluations shall include student academic progress as a significant component and an overall summative rating.
Nowhere in “sets . . . goals,” “documents . . . progress,” “provides evidence,” or “uses . . . data” do the guidelines say that the teacher shall be evaluated based on how much the students learn.
This is important because experience teaches us that teacher evaluations that are not firmly grounded in objective data are inflated and meaningless:
- In the 2011 the statewide report of teacher evaluations (the only such report), three of 7,257 ratings were “unsatisfactory” and forty-nine were “needs improvement.” All the rest were “meets” or “exceeds” expectations.
- In twelve of the Richmond schools denied accreditation this year, four of 444 (0.9%) teachers were rated “unacceptable” and 32 (7.2%), “developing/needs improvement.” That is, only 8.1% of the teachers in these schools that had failed accreditation for four years running were less than “proficient.”
For a more detailed analysis of the Board’s feckless evasion of the law, see this.