EVALUATION
2.6 TEACHER EVALUATION IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA
Literature on models of teacher evaluation used in the international arena is critically discussed to provide a macro perspective on the topic under discussion. It is also used to gauge whether forms of appraisal used in developed countries are appropriate for the South African context.
In a number of countries, for example, UK, New Zealand, Israel and
Singapore there are formal performance management schemes and teachers’ career structures are formalized in the sense that progression to the next phase depends on
some sort of assessment. The practice of teacher evaluation varies from country to country. In some cases it is carried out by head teachers, in others by line managers or by external inspectors and supervisors.
The OFSTED method of inspection used in the UK is an outcomes-based model of inspection done by a non-ministerial government department. Basically the two major outcomes are the school’s results and the pupils’ achievement. After the inspection feedback is provided to each teacher, to the head teacher and to the school board. A detailed inspection report is provided to the school with a summary report to each school for all parents. In some cases, the inspectors will have to report that the school is underachieving or has some more serious weaknesses and requires special measures.
An action plan has to be approved by the Secretary of State and the school has two years to become acceptable. A school may have to close if it is unsuccessful after the intervention (OFSTED 2000:118).
Teacher performance and its management have been translated into practice for New Zealand teachers by two autonomous bodies of the state. The Education Review Office (ERO) has set the required performance expected of teachers while the Ministry of Education has made explicit the requirements for the management of teacher
performance.. Clark (1997) has shown how the approaches in spite of being set by two different organizations dovetail quite well.
The ERO report, ‘The Capable Teacher’ (ERO 1998: 3) states:
Performance can de defined as the results actually achieved by a particular teacher within his or her individual performance agreement with the employer, as appraised by the employer………
… The performance of the teacher in the job should be assessed through performance criteria and expected results specified in the performance agreement.
The question arises: how does the Ministry of Education in New Zealand define a
‘capable teacher’? The ERO sought to operationalise its definition in terms of teacher competencies and capabilities that a teacher needs to bring to his/her job to fulfill the required functions. Thus core competencies are linked to minimum standards of what a teacher should know and do. Core competencies are generic enough to apply to any teacher in any school. Core competencies may assist in the assessment of a teacher but
this in itself is not sufficient for performance evaluation. These should be measured against performance criteria and expected results. The ERO specifies a set of 100 behaviours that teachers are expected to demonstrate grouped under four headings:
professional knowledge (25); professional practice (38); professional relationships (20) and professional leadership (17).
After examining the framework of managing teacher performance in the UK and New Zealand a number of issues come to the fore which could also apply to other countries that use similar models for managing teacher performance. These models, with their general mandatory frameworks, use the top-down strategy and focus on accountability, measurement and results. Furthermore, both these systems have financial incentives attached to them. It is clear that a narrow utilitarian approach to accountability drives the management of teacher performance. It is governed by economic rationality with clear definitions of professional expectations and measures of observable behaviour.
The point to be made is that teaching cannot be reduced to that which is behaviorally specifiable, observable and measurable. The reason for this is simple. Behaviour traits can be displayed in a vast number of ways on different occasions under a variety of of conditions generating multiple interpretations depending on who is observing them.
The other point is that principals and/or senior staff are the managers of the appraisal process while teachers have become the providers of the specified services and it is the responsibility of the former to monitor the latter. There is also the possibility that those in power/positions of authority can use their power to impose on those subject under their authority, a method of control which is presented to the latter as being in their best interest when clearly this is far from the case (Clarke 1997: 109).
By contrast, in Japan, performance management focuses on advice from ‘master teachers’ or visiting supervisors but there is no formal assessment as such. A requirement is that teachers rotate to demographically different areas which roughly correspond to major socio-economic divisions. Lewis (1995: 23) notes that the status and prestige given to people who teach is high in comparison to other jobs. It appears that there is no need for a national appraisal scheme to manage performance in this case as teachers are regarded as high status employees and there is satisfaction with the way this high status is achieved and maintained. Reynolds and Farrel (1996: 54-57) discuss
the high status of teachers in Pacific Rim societies as one key factors in the superior educational achievement of these learners in East Asia. In these countries, religious and cultural traditions place a high value on learning (Middlewood and Cardno 2001:185).
The criticism of performance management systems employed in education in countries like the UK and New Zealand must not be taken to be a rejection of
accountability which the earlier arguments have shown is a legitimate expectation of teachers but what one has to object to is when accountability does not have as its central concern the educational ideal of the enhancement of teaching and learning and the example of Japan demonstrates that alternatives can work.