Should Teachers Be Evaluated Annually?

Some Arkansas district leaders say no

I was asked recently about the political prospects for merit pay for teachers. I said that I was generally optimistic about the prospects of extra compensation for geographic or subject-area shortage areas, but I’m less optimistic about performance pay.

Sure, there are some high-profile successes and generally positive research support behind merit pay, but the politics behind teacher evaluation are bad.

My latest example of this comes from Arkansas, where district leaders are currently pushing back against the idea that teachers should even be evaluated every year.

Last year, Arkansas legislators passed a sweeping piece of legislation called the LEARNS Act. Among other things, it raised the average Arkansas teacher salary by $6,000.

As David Ramsey from the Arkansas Times reports, the bill also included a $10 million Merit Teacher Incentive Fund that would award teachers an additional $10,000 bonus for things like improving student test scores; serving as mentors to aspiring teachers; participating in yearlong residencies as an aspiring teacher; or instructing in subject areas or geographical areas that have had a teacher shortage.

The legislation is now going through rule-making, and Ramsey reports that the biggest sticking point is that the rules would require districts to conduct annual teacher evaluations:

Holly Glover, director of curriculum and instruction for the Beebe School District, wrote in her comment, “It would be unethical and unrealistic to require a summative evaluation for every teacher in the state every year to be eligible for merit pay.”

And here’s Karen Walters, superintendent of the Bryant School District:

DESE personnel have always agreed that meaningful summative evaluations were not practical to complete on every employee every year. This reason is why the law was written in its current form.

Principals will feel pressured to provide everyone with a summative evaluation every year due to the possibility of teachers receiving merit pay.

Mike Mertens, assistant executive director of the Arkansas Association of Education Administrators, concurred: “Meaningful summative evaluations are not practical to complete on every employee every year,” he wrote in his comment. Attempts to comply for teachers that wish to be eligible for the award “may limit quality and meaningful feedback if required every year,” Mertens added.

It’s possible I’m reading too much into this, but it’s not a good sign that we’re still having this debate over whether teachers should be evaluated annually or not.

But I’m going to end on a happy note. It’s possible the Arkansas approach will win out. After all, it’s a voluntary program, and teachers don’t have to participate if they don’t want to. Some districts may not want to evaluate their teachers annually, but their teachers might begin asking for more frequent evaluations if that’s the only way they can show that they deserve a $10,000 merit bonus.