As the second week of the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) teachers’ strike begins, the role of teachers’ unions burns brightly in the minds of many Americans. Labor negotiations are intrinsically complicated and often center on the rights of the worker. That is part of the case here – CPS teachers are concerned about the length of their contracts and future raises. But there is something else at stake here: evaluations.
Teacher evaluations are notoriously controversial. How significant a role should student test scores play? If not test scores, on what other measurable aspect should teacher performance be evaluated? In the case of Chicago, student test scores under law must make up 30% of a teacher’s evaluation. The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) must clearly accept this mandated minimum, but
CPS is pushing for an even higher ratio, even up to 40%.
It seems Chicago has brought us back to an existential question: how directly can you connect student performance with a specific teacher?
Teachers have enormous opportunity to influence and guide students, but it is important to note the combination of risk factors that CPS students exhibit. The conditions at home are hugely influential and have an enormous impact on a student’s potential for success. Coming from a low-income family
is incredibly significant; nearly 90% of CPS students come
from such low-income families. Other dropout risk factors include being a member of a racial or ethnic minority group or being male. Almost 42% of CPS students are African-American and 44% are Latino.
While important to note, the fact that many students enter school with risk factors stacked against them should not deemphasize the opportunity that teachers have in turning these young lives around. Teachers are trained to help students, to get them through rough patches, and to help them progress. The question really seems to be, though, how we can find a fair and accurate way to measure the work that teachers are doing.
