Teacher Evaluations in Chicago

I have been constantly reading in the news and hearing about the Chicago teacher strike over the last two weeks. The strike has goals to have higher teacher raises for the extended school hours but the main focus of the strike has been about teacher evaluations. The Mayer of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, wants to implement a rigorous evaluation system of the teachers partly based on student test scores. Many of the teachers believe this is an unfair way of being evaluated because student performance is linked to conditions in a students home and neighborhood so it would be unfair to punish the teachers for this. In this New York Times editorial, the author argues that test scores are an important part in evaluating teachers because most teacher evaluations are based on principals visiting classrooms who "declare nearly every teacher good, or at least competent, even in failing schools where very few if any children meet basic educational standards."

While I agree that the evaluation system definitely needs to be revamped, I don't agree that test scores should be everything. An objective evaluator should be sent to each classroom to really judge the teachers and how they interact with their students. It is impossible to measure on a standardized test how a teacher can inspire their students to enjoy learning, and in my opinion that should be the single most important job of any teacher. A teacher might do this by starting with subjects that interest the students in order to engage them, and that material might not be taught on a standardized test. On the contrary, a teacher who strictly teaches to a test may produce better student test scores, but the students may learn to resent learning which does not bode well for their future.

The teachers who argue that test scores are not fair because the conditions of where the students live is linked to their performance are probably in one of two groups. They are either teachers that fail to teach their students well, or teachers that inspire their students to enjoy learning, but weren't yet able to make a drastic difference in their test scores. Testing based evaluations, even if they take into account the students conditions, are not even able to separate the greatest teachers from the worst teachers. I really believe that a much stricter evaluation system should be implemented, however only a very small percentage of the teacher evaluation should be based on student test scores. Somehow, we have to create more classroom sit ins by unbiased officials. This way they can get a feel of the classroom environment and only keep the best teachers.

How do you think is the best way to evaluate our teachers?