Saturday, January 25, 2014

Evaluation That Matters

In education, there is a great deal of discussion of using value-added measures as part of the determining factor for teacher evaluation. The concept behind this is that there should be some quantitatively measurable product that lets us compare teacher to teacher. Good teachers should produce higher levels of measurable value-added on standardized tests and poor teachers will produce less. Furthermore, it is conceptualized that this works in business.

Does it? Should it? Will it? The Gates Foundation which has been funneling hundreds of millions of funds has been a significant proponent for value-added. The same leadership from Microsoft that built a software empire and with Bill Gates as Chairman of the Board has watched their empire start to fade into decline. It is easy to think of the ubiquitous nature of Microsoft products, Windows, Office, and Xbox. However, only one of those products has a future (Xbox) where as new Windows products are frequently being ignored, only purchased by enterprise that is dependent on legacy software and consumers not quite ready to switch to OS-X, Chrome, Android, or iOS. The real story is how Microsoft lost its innovative edge. To understand that is to understand it's employee evaluation system that pitted employee against employee, destroyed team work, and eliminated trust. The story of this is Stack Ranking. Microsoft, as well as Adobe and others, began evaluating their employees on a curve. In each group, based on the performance and value given during that time, a few employees were evaluated real high, a few real low, and most in the middle. As a result of this methodology, top performers moved around the company to avoid working with other top performers. Cut throat competition occurred, the type that produced only a few winners and multitudes of losers. Employees looked at only their value, knowing that it was better for them if others did worse. Team work, innovation, and creativity were all lost as individuals looked only to short term gains. While the Department of Education through Race to the Top requirements, prompted by the Gates Foundation looks to push forward value-added measurement, Adobe, Microsoft, and others are backing away from it having seen their innovation edge gone and as corporations that are shells of their once great selves.

The interesting thing is that teachers are prideful people. They are caring people who entered the profession to make a difference. Principals and district administrators are the same, they simply discovered that they could help more kids learn and grow if they were supporting instructional development for whole schools and whole school communities. I've worked with growth measurements for eight years. Each time a teacher gets their results, they analyze and over analyze each student's performance. They question why students went up. They perseverate on each child that didn't grow or didn't grow enough. Instantly they have fifteen adjustments that they are preparing to do to support children. Growth measures, when consistently shared, just by their very existence are powerful tools. They are one part of the complex picture that is a child's development.

For evaluation to matter, it isn't an experience of some "boss" telling some "employee" you need to change this or do that. Evaluation that matters starts with the leader asking questions and listening to the employee. Conversations that cultivate brainstorming, exploration, and the development of interdependent innovation. Very little of the world of evaluation is about removing employees from the workplace in any career field. The majority of evaluation is about finding and generating greatness within ourselves and our work group. Great leaders find ways to create synergy within their work groups. They curate their questions so that employees can generate solutions that make a difference.

Teachers get it. They understand that administrators come and go. Many teachers have been here long before the principal arrived and will be here long after the principal is gone. Over the journey of time, our judgements matter very little. It is their judgement that matters most. They will react to the Excellent, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement, or Unsatisfactory ranking, but those our external valuations. Temporary titles based on the judgement of a temporary individual. Their pride in performance and their view of each child's growth is what matters. As leaders, if we can facilitate through questions, support, and discovery personal reflective growth in our teachers, we will make a difference in our teachers' lives and the lives of each child they teach.





No comments:

Post a Comment