Somehow I missed this Washington Post opinion piece by first-year, second-career high school teacher Michelle Kerr. Fortunately, Coach Brown mentioned it and so I was able to read it.

I think one of the problems with teacher evaluations is that there is disagreement over whether teaching can actually be measured. I've heard educators insist that great teaching is like the Supreme Court's definition of pornography: It is difficult to define, but you know it when you see it. I also think that a key question is whether you're measuring the inputs or the outputs. Is it good teaching if the teacher does and outstanding job of doing everything just right and yet students don't master the material? Is it good teaching if a teachers uses an unorthodox strategy which has great success in getting students to learn the material?

I believe you must look at the output... are the students mastering the material. Good teaching that doesn't achieve that is merely entertaining performance art.

Ms. Kerr's suggestion is that you use student performance to measure good teaching, but she includes four caveats:

1. Teachers be assessed based on only those students with 90 percent or higher attendance.
2. Teachers be allowed to remove disruptive students from their classroom on a day-to-day basis.
3. Students who don't achieve "basic" proficiency in a state test be prohibited from moving forward to the next class in the progression.
4. That teachers be assessed on student improvement, not an absolute standard -- the so-called value-added assessment.

I think Ms. Kerr is right on track. I think her four points a reasonable and appropriate. It is refreshing to see someone who is trying to embrace accountability instead of trying to place the blame for poor student performance on everyone else. As Coach Brown points out:

Now, what’s amusing is that this sort of thing should be happening anyway without some opinion editorial having to making its way around the Internet. Those things aren’t teacher evaluation issues, they are basic education issues. Attendance, classroom management, academic achievement, student improvement…..sounds like the foundation for good education.

I think Ms. Kerr and the Coach are right. A teacher evaluation system based on these basic principals of good education would serve both students and teachers better. In-effective teachers would learn that they are in-effective and could be guided through improving their instructional practices. Effective teachers could be recognized as such as receive monetary or non-monetary rewards to encourage continued success. It is a win-win scenario for all involved. To me, this is a formula for racing to the top.