Email
By Rep. Rick Miera
Democrat, Chair of the House
Education Committee
And Ellen Bernstein
President, Albuquerque Teachers Federation
We appreciate the Journal’s editorial about the dedicated teachers at Susie Rayos Marmon Elementary who are working on their National Board Certification. We couldn’t agree more.
Teachers certified by the National Board add a great deal of value to their students and to the teaching force. That is why, in 1999, the New Mexico Legislature passed legislation to recognize and compensate these teachers and encourages more of them to aspire to earn this prestigious credential. And, that is the reason the Albuquerque Teachers Federation has provided comprehensive support for aspiring National Board candidates.
As the Journal correctly points out, teachers who earn the certification – or who aspire to it – are lifelong learners who, like most teachers, work to pass that desire on to their students.
The process teachers go through to achieve National Board Certification is called an authentic assessment. What makes it authentic? The assessment of their teaching is directly connected to the work they do every day with their students.
The Journal quoted a study that confirms that teachers with National Board Certification make a qualitative difference for their students. That is why New Mexico modeled the 3-Tiered Licensure dossier process after national boards. Our 3-Tiered licensing system for teachers is also an authentic assessment. It centers on each teacher’s ability to teach well and to assess student’s learning. It is connected to their actual work.
Authentic assessments should be the focus of any future legislation, both for our teachers in their evaluations and for our students. After all, if we value outcomes for our students, such as the ability to understand essential concepts, work in groups, think critically and solve problems, we must measure those abilities. And, if we value those attributes in student learning, then we are obligated to value, and assess, the same qualities in teaching.
Standardized tests are not authentic or instructionally sensitive. They do not represent the degree of students’ mastery, nor do they accurately reflect the quality of the instruction. There is no research-based link between test scores and teaching effectiveness.
Other nations use performance-based or authentic assessments, where students are evaluated on the basis of real work such as essays, projects and activities. Ironically, because these nations do not focus on teaching to standardized tests, they even score higher than U.S. students on those kinds of tests.
We have proposed a better way to link student learning, teacher effectiveness and teacher evaluation. We believe that an overhaul of the teacher evaluation system must be well balanced and include observations by supervisors, input from students and a more authentic measure of how much students have learned.
The Public Education Department rule places too much emphasis on testing and not enough on observing teachers teach and other measures like student surveys.
But more important, we want more for New Mexico’s students than a curriculum based on high-stakes testing. We know that when “effective” teaching is defined primarily by test scores, it creates incentives to spend time on the wrong things, like broad surface knowledge and test prep, rather than the right things, like deep conceptual understanding. Educators know that much of what a student really understands is better demonstrated through projects or research, or other means that are not “standardized.” Many legislators also know the importance of using other measures of student knowledge, which is why we supported an alternative plan last session.
An example of a more authentic link between teachers and student outcomes is Student Learning Objectives. The process of setting objectives requires teachers to create goals for their students, connected to the standards, and to measure student progress toward those goals.
In this letter, we have presented our points of agreement, as well as where, how and why we differ with others on these important issues. But we welcome the discussion. It is a debate our children deserve.
