Why Teacher Quality Matters
Should student-achievement data be used to evaluate teachers? This question is vehemently debated in collective-bargaining negotiations across the country, with state superintendents and mayors pushing for achievement to be given more weight and teachers' unions strongly opposing such policies. Today this is one of the most important issues facing education reformers. On Friday in Washington, D.C., the American Action Forum (AAF) will delve into this issue with a diverse panel of education-policy experts.
According to the National Council on Teacher Quality, evaluations that factor in student achievement have become dramatically more common in recent years. In 2009, only 14 states required annual evaluations of all teachers, and 35 states did not require any measure of student performance to be used in teacher evaluations at all. By 2012, 23 states required annual teacher evaluations, and 24 states required objective measures of student achievement to be part of how teacher performance is evaluated. In twelve states, student achievement is required to be the principal measure in evaluating teachers.
Still, as I pointed out in an AAF report released in June ("Collective Bargaining and Student Academic Achievement"), teachers' unions continue to oppose these policies. For example, in Chicago's and New York City's most recent teacher collective-bargaining negotiations, language linking student performance with teacher evaluations was seriously diluted or not included at all.
In the AAF paper I also reported that students in right-to-work states continue to outperform their union-educated peers. For example, in 2011, 40 percent of fourth graders nationwide performed at or above grade level in math, and 32 percent of were reading at or above grade level. In Chicago the percentages were lower by one-half, and in New York they were lower by one third.
Additionally, teachers' unions have been successful in maintaining tenure policies that allow poorly qualified teachers to remain in the classroom. This affects students' performance, both in school and after they graduate.
Earlier this year, in "The Long Term Impacts of Teachers: Teacher Value Added and Student Outcomes on Adulthood," researchers at Harvard and Columbia concluded that good teachers have a positive effect on students throughout their adult lives. The paper argues that students assigned to high-value-added teachers are more likely to attend college, earn high salaries, and live in good neighborhoods, and less likely to have children as teenagers.
The AAF panel discussion will allow for a stimulating debate on whether academic performance will improve if teachers are measured based on student outcomes. For policymakers who are considering changes to the No Child Left Behind Act, these questions are critical for ensuring that our students, particularly poor and minority students, receive a quality education.
Sally Lovejoy is an education expert with the American Action Forum.
