NYC Schools Will Use Third-Party Observers in Evaluating Teachers

ANALYSIS | New York City Schools recently agreed to begin using third-party observers, known as independent validators, to monitor teachers who received an ineffective rating under the new evaluation system during the previous school year. The observers, who will be contracted through a company, are to be licensed teachers, former administrators and principals. They will spend three days a year monitoring each teacher, and they will be responsible for approximately 50 to 80 teachers total.

If the validator agrees with the administrator's findings, and a teacher is deemed ineffective for a second year in a row, an expedited termination process of the teacher can begin. The use of third-party validators is hoped to bring more fairness to the process of teacher evaluations by using impartial persons, and it is also expected to provide a more comprehensive evaluation since the validators will have experience in the areas they are evaluating. Despite the fact that a similar process has already been used in New Haven, it is still unclear as to whether or not the updated evaluation process produces better teaching.

As far as implementing changes that will have an impact on the quality of education received by students, I, as an educator, feel that this is a step in the right direction. Using third-party, impartial observers will make the evaluation process of ineffective teachers more fair and reliable. When teachers are evaluated by administrators, they may be at an unfair advantage depending on the administrator's background. If a principal or vice principal was a former history teacher, who only taught for three years before taking an administrative position, they might not understand best practices as they apply to the teaching of English or mathematics.

The success of this initiative, however, will depend upon the guidelines under which it is run. First, I feel that the days chosen for observation should be unknown to the teacher. Many people would scoff at this idea, but I would deem it necessary. As a teacher, if I know exactly which days I'm going to be observed, I can make sure to put on a brilliant performance in the classroom that day. The rest of the days, I could go back to using ineffective teaching methods and putting little effort into my instruction. I would also be extremely hesitant to say that three days is enough time to determine the effectiveness of one teacher, but cost no doubt plays a large role in the length of observation time.

Second, the validators must be well-qualified in order for the process to be effective. If former math teachers are used to monitor art teachers, the evaluation process will be no better off. The same goes for using validators who only spent a limited amount of time in the classroom or who are not current on best practices in teaching. Using observers who have extensive experience in the subject area of the teacher they are evaluating, and are up-to-date on effective teaching strategies, can allow for timely and meaningful feedback to help the ineffective teachers improve.

If this new evaluation process is approached as a system to help turn ineffective teachers into effective ones, rather than a punishment or an effort to get rid of them, it has the potential to have a positive impact.

Andrea Hayes is an English and mathematics teacher in Michigan. She holds a B.A. in secondary education and an M.A. in Education.