Now most school systems are using Educate Alabama for evaluation. "EDUCATE Alabama is a strictly formative evaluation system designed to provide data about a teacher’s current practices measured against the AQTS that can be used to set expectations, goals, and plans for teacher professional growth," (Jones & Starnes, n.d., p. 2).
Robert Marzano and Julia Simms told us in their book Coaching Classroom Instruction that "one strong theme in the discussion of coaching is that it should be nonevaluative in nature," (2013, p. 8). So how do you incorporate coaching into an environment that requires evaluation? It should be a vital part of the collaboration. EducateAlabama was created to foster growth. It was never meant to be punishment, although many teachers do not see the difference if their coach/evaluator does not promote the growth aspect.
According to Marzano and Simms there are at least three requirements for effective coaching. Those are trust, feedback, and choice. (2013, p. 10-11). In a summative model like PEPE, the trust and the choice are almost non-existent. This leads to distrust and conflict with very little growth. Administrators and/or the ALSDE need to do a better job marketing the evaluation process. EducateAlabama already contains many of the items listed by Marzano and Simms as part of the "Foundation for coaching," (2013, p. 19). It uses a measurement scale: Emerging, Applying, Integrating, and Innovating. It also includes a self-assessment and teachers select growth goals.
If the foundation is there and the collaboration is there, it is our responsibility to ensure that teachers and administrators are able to understand the benefit of including coaching into their evaluation process.
Administrators must be willing and able to take ownership of the growth and development of their teachers. Far too often do I see this being done just because it has to be and not because it is the right thing to do. Not all systems can have instructional coaches for the middle and high schools, that responsibility should fall to the administrators in the building.
References
aball9448 (2016, November 15) Ball - EA 635 Administrator as an Instructional Coach [Video File] Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncroBqUyhNI
Marzano, R. and Simms, J. (2013) Coaching Classroom Instruction. Marzano Research Laboratory: Bloomington, IN.
Jones, E, and Starnes, T. (n.d.) EducateAlabama Teacher Orientation Module. ALSDE Retrieved from: http://www.nctq.org/docs/EDUCATEAlabamatea_orientation_module_1.pdf
Wesley,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your blog. It is interesting to read your perspective as coming from an administrator. You're absolutely right. Having the role of evaluator goes directly against Marzano's (2013) recommendation for coaching to be a nonthreatening, peer-to-peer situation. The good thing is, Marzano (2013) addresses this issue when it is the administrator: "If administrators coach teachers whom they also evaluate, it is important for them to emphasize learning and growth" (p.9). I'd be willing to bet that you could make coaching work because I'm sure you have spent time and energy working on two things: relationships and communication. When those two things are healthy, I think a coaching cycle could work!
Marzano, R.J. & Simms, J.A. (2012). Coaching classroom instruction. Marzano Research Laboratory: Bloomington, IN.
Wesley,
ReplyDeleteI completely understand your frustration as an administrator feeling like you are "stuck" between an evaluator and a coach. Marzano (2013) mentioned that in order for growth to occur, communication must take place in a nonthreatening environment. That is often a difficult place to reach as an administrator. I agree with Valerie, having an positive relationship and communication style will help in this environment.
Marzano, R.J. & Simms, J.A. (2012). Coaching classroom instruction. Marzano Research Laboratory: Bloomington, IN.