The following is the final post of a series of posts that provide a verbatim reply (with a somewhat different order) to a “clinical evaluation” (a performance evaluation of my teaching) made by the principal of Ashern Central School (Ashern, Manitoba, Canada), Neil MacNeil, in the fall of 2011 when I was teaching grades 6, 7 and 8 French.
I provided Mr. MacNeil’s assessment grade by grade in separate posts, followed by my reflections (response). In other words, the performance evaluation of the three grades was distributed over three posts.
Further posts followed that included performance evaluation criteria for Domain I (Professional Responsibilities), Domain II (Educational Environments) and Domain III (Teaching and Learning), with Mr. MacNeil’s comments and my reflections (response).
This post deals with the performance evaluation criteria of Domain IV (Professional Relationships), with Mr. MacNeil’s comments and my reflections (response).
When I refer to “see above” in some of the posts, it probably refers to previous posts.
The radical left should expose both what management does and how it does it. Discussion of the situation that various kinds of employees face need to be openly discussed, but to do that it is necessary to expose, in a transparent way, managerial behaviour.
Lakeshore School Division
Teacher Clin
ical Evaluation Report
Teacher: Fred Harris School: Ashern Central School Subject/Grade: MY French; ELA Trans. Focus 30S; SY Support The teacher and administrator will review Administrative Regulations and Procedures Evaluation Process-Professional Staff (2.3)
Domain 4: Professional Relationships
4a. Effective communication with families
4b. Self-Assessment and Reflection
4c. Contribution to School and District
4d. Growing and developing Professionally
4f. Professionalism
Administrator’s Comments
Fred has demonstrated a willingness to contact parents of the students in his classes to share concerns that he has about their learning or behaviours. While that is laudable, there have also been instances where the parents of his students have expressed that they want nothing to do with him, and that they have no respect for him or for his teaching.
Fred’s own analysis of issues raised throughout these observations and our discussions relevant to all aspects of his performance has tended strongly toward “blaming students” for identified concerns. With some reluctance, he has begun to indicate some acknowledgement of concerns about his classroom management, saying that he has not been strict enough with students, and that he needs to be more strict. There has been no indication that he links student misbehaviours and lack of engagement to his pedagogy, planning for lessons or the delivery of lessons, and a resultant lack of respect, rapport and engagement.
Fred is a member of the Lakeshore Teachers’ Association executive. He has also provided some materials in the staff room for perusal by staff members, pertaining to his own research on education. Fred has not been involved in any extracurricular activities with students of which I am aware.
Prior to beginning this process of clinical evaluation, Fred had submitted a professional growth plan which identified two goals for this year. In conversation with myself and with the superintendent, it was pointed out that this professional growth plan lacked focus, and any evident indication of how it might serve to improve the education of students. Fred has indicated that he enjoys the process of research into educational issues, but it is not clear how this is being translated into more effective learning for students.
Teacher’s Reflections
“Fred has demonstrated a willingness to contact parents of the students in his classes to share concerns that he has about their learning or behaviours. While that is laudable, there have also been instances where the parents of his students have expressed that they want nothing to do with him, and that they have no respect for him or for his teaching.”
Firstly, the administrator has never informed me of this until now.
As for contacting parents, in one instance I met one of the grade 8 students and the father on Sunday at 9:00 p.m at Petro Canada to accommodate his schedule (he works shifts). I was concerned about the lack of effort of the student and told the father about this concern.
Re: “Fred’s own analysis of issues raised throughout these observations and our discussions relevant to all aspects of his performance has tended strongly toward “blaming students” for identified concerns. With some reluctance, he has begun to indicate some acknowledgement of concerns about his classroom management, saying that he has not been strict enough with students, and that he needs to be more strict. There has been no indication that he links student misbehaviours and lack of engagement to his pedagogy, planning for lessons or the delivery of lessons, and a resultant lack of respect, rapport and engagement.”
There may or may not be a link between student misbehaviours and lack of engagement to my pedagogy, but the establishment of such a link requires an effort to understand the pedagogy. Furthermore, the implication is that the lack of engagement seems to be entirely (or at least mainly) a function of pedagogy; the structure of the curriculum or the definition of learning in terms of means rather than in terms of ends has nothing to do with lack of engagement.
I will reiterate that the first thing that I said during the third post-conference was my overestimation of the ability of the students. However, I hardly blame the students for everything. Indeed, I emphasize with some of the students in the grade 6 class and hardly blame those who live in poverty for their situation.
As for the school system, I have implied that a system which treats human beings as mere “learning machines,” with learning the end and life the means, rather than learning being the means and life the end, is bound to alienate some students—especially those who lack the “cultural capital” typical of the school system.
Re: “Fred is a member of the Lakeshore Teachers’ Association executive. He has also provided some materials in the staff room for perusal by staff members, pertaining to his own research on education. Fred has not been involved in any extracurricular activities with students of which I am aware.”
I participated in two pancake breakfasts. [I forgot that I had also participated in the annual Terry Fox Run–I had had invasive bladder cancer that was diagnosed in March 2009).
Re: “Prior to beginning this process of clinical evaluation, Fred had submitted a professional growth plan which identified two goals for this year. In conversation with myself and with the superintendent, it was pointed out that this professional growth plan lacked focus, and any evident indication of how it might serve to improve the education of students. Fred has indicated that he enjoys the process of research into educational issues, but it is not clear how this is being translated into more effective learning for students.”
One of the goals was to provide research articles for the staff. I thought it was something where I could develop and could uniquely contribute—a major function of education.
I consider that my capacity for research, at least in the context of Ashern Central School, is what I have to contribute uniquely to the school. I try to look at the larger picture. I also try to connect it up to the smaller picture. Whether I am successful or not is, of course, debatable. I cannot force the teachers to read the research, but I can certainly provide them with the opportunity to do so.
- Administrator’s General Comments Related to the Teacher’s Performance during the Evaluation
During the process of three formal observations and attendant pre- and post-conferences, serious concerns have arisen about the effectiveness of the French program being provided to middle years students in this school. Student learning appears to be taking place very slowly. Their behaviours during classes are often inappropriate, and indicate a very high degree of disengagement from the course. Relationships between Fred and his students tend to be dysfunctional, and Fred has been unable to find a way to effectively remediate this issue. Planning for lessons and the delivery of these lessons appears disjointed and somewhat haphazard, with the accomplishment of tasks seeming to be more important than student learning goals. As these and other concerns have been discussed, Fred has tended to find fault with the students, with the structure of the school system and placement of students in his classes, and only reluctantly and with prompting to identify any issues with his own performance. Even then, this has tended to simply saying that he needs to be more strict, a response which would almost surely elicit even more negative reaction from students in his classes than is currently present.
- Teacher’s Reflections: Professional Goals and Activities to be Addressed
- Summation of lessons at end of class
- More analytic breakdown of lessons for grade 8s
- Being more “with it” in class (more observant of student behaviours)
- Addressing student behaviours more consistently
- Introduction of peer and self-assessment
- More formative assessment
- Somewhat more organized physical space
- Administrator’s Recommendations
Comments: I have read and discussed this evaluation report with the Administrator.
- A teacher may comment, in writing, within 5 teaching days of receiving the report.
- The teacher receives the original copy of this completed and signed form.
- A copy of this completed and signed form must be forwarded to the Superintendent on or before November 30th and March 31st of the current school year.
________________________________ _____________________________
Teacher’s Signature Date
________________________________ _____________________________
Administrator’s Signature Date
The Abolitionary 