For several years now, teacher evaluation has dominated education-policy discussions in statehouses and otherwise. But for the most part, the country鈥檚 430,000 special education teachers have been left out of the discussion.
The Council for Exceptional Children is trying to change that. In October, the advocacy group released a . And today, about 30 leaders from membership organizations, state and local education offices, and schools gathered in Arlington, Va., to discuss the CEC鈥檚 recommendations.
The topic is quite complicated鈥攅ven more complicated than, well, general teacher evaluation. As the CEC President Margaret McLaughlin explained, special education teachers can serve in any number of capacities鈥攁s intervention specialists, co-teachers, lead teachers, and consultants to general education teachers鈥攁nd with students who have a wide variety of needs. The central issue, McLaughlin said, is figuring out how to evaluate performance in a way that 鈥渃an accommodate the breadth and variety of experiences and expectations we have for the teachers of these students.鈥�
At the same time, Lindsay Jones, the CEC鈥檚 senior director for policy and advocacy, emphasized that, ideally, schools should be able use only one evaluation system for all teachers. 鈥淲e hear too much that special education and general education can operate in silos,鈥� she said. 鈥淥ne system has to be in place for everyone to ensure that everyone shares common goals, common language.鈥�
鈥淲e don鈥檛 want to exclude these teachers any more than we want to exclude the children [they work with] from these reforms,鈥� said McLaughlin.
Some of the elements the CEC identifies as necessary for special ed teacher evaluations are the same as those that stakeholders have generally agreed are necessary for all teacher evaluations: They should be based on multiple measures, designed to align with professional development and support programs, and conducted by trained evaluators. Jones also emphasized the importance of making sure principals understand special 糖心动漫vlog鈥� unique roles and duties.
The CEC also supports the more controversial (but ever-expanding) practice of including student-growth measures in teacher evaluations. However, the organization鈥檚 position statement warns that value-added data based on student test scores are 鈥渋nvalid for two teachers in a co-teaching environment鈥� and that 鈥渕ost state data systems are not sophisticated enough to account for innovative models of instructional organization.鈥�
The CEC鈥檚 position paper doesn鈥檛 offer a specific list of growth measures that should be included in an evaluation instead or suggest the percentage of a teacher鈥檚 evaluation those measures should account for. When pressed on this at the meeting, Deborah Ziegler, CEC鈥檚 associate executive director for policy and advocacy, said, 鈥淚 don鈥檛 know that there鈥檚 any magic percentage, but I can tell you we don鈥檛 believe it should be 50 percent. Wherever it is鈥攁t the lower levels of 20 to 30 percent鈥攊t should use multiple measures.鈥� While standardized test scores would likely need to make up part of that, she said, measures such as student surveys, parent surveys, and portfolios could also be used.
One of the panel members at the meeting, Alexandria, Va., school district special education director Jane Quenneville, said her district is allowing special ed teachers and administrators to agree on teacher-administrated assessments to use for student growth (which currently accounts for 20 percent of a teacher鈥檚 evaluations). The district offers a list of assessment options, including the Scholastic Reading Inventory and the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening.
Meanwhile, the CEC contends a student鈥檚 progress on his or her individualized education plan goals should not be used as a measure of growth. 鈥淒oing so may compromise the integrity of the IEP, shifting its focus from what is designed to be a child-centered document to the performance of the teacher,鈥� the group鈥檚 position paper states.
Jones expanded on that point at the meeting. 鈥淲e鈥檝e seen, throughout the nation this year, cheating scandals,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e don鈥檛 want to create a system that incentivizes someone to lower their expectations for children.鈥� An evaluation should, however, include a measure of how well special education teachers develop and implement IEPs, according to the CEC.
Much of what was said at the gathering pointed to the fact that determining best practices for special ed teacher evaluation is an ongoing, iterative process. Both Jones and McLaughlin made pleas for increased funding for research around value-added scores. And McLaughlin said she is hopeful that the new assessments based on the Common Core State Standards will offer more accurate measures of student growth. 鈥淚t is so important that we get this right,鈥� she said.