What a great post. Having a small bit of experience as a university supervisor of credential candidates, I’ve got an inkling of what you are feeling. It’s a challenging task. The decision whether to advance a candidate to certification whom you have serious reservations about parallels the decision to terminate an ineffective teacher. It’s critical that serious support work precedes the decision. My bet is that instructional leaders like you in the field have a lot of useful insights for credential program instructors and supervisors in terms of assessment and evaluation. In my book, assessment can and should serve accountability as well as improvement; assessment should always aim to improve the future, though actions the consequence of assessment may seem harsh in the moment. Politically, I support tenure laws because they assure due process, but I struggle philosophically. The devil is in the details of due process. I like what you say about self-accountability and self-assessment. I’d like to see more of it at all levels. These aspects are particularly strong elements of teacher-prep but are improving. In the best case the teacher and the supervisor are able to agree on the validity of the evidence even if they may have disagreements on the interpretation.
I see the parallels, Terry - thank you for making that connection. I also appreciate how you embrace the complexity of tenure and accountability. And yes to mutual agreement on what should count as evidence for evaluation! I appreciate your presence here. -Matt
What a great post. Having a small bit of experience as a university supervisor of credential candidates, I’ve got an inkling of what you are feeling. It’s a challenging task. The decision whether to advance a candidate to certification whom you have serious reservations about parallels the decision to terminate an ineffective teacher. It’s critical that serious support work precedes the decision. My bet is that instructional leaders like you in the field have a lot of useful insights for credential program instructors and supervisors in terms of assessment and evaluation. In my book, assessment can and should serve accountability as well as improvement; assessment should always aim to improve the future, though actions the consequence of assessment may seem harsh in the moment. Politically, I support tenure laws because they assure due process, but I struggle philosophically. The devil is in the details of due process. I like what you say about self-accountability and self-assessment. I’d like to see more of it at all levels. These aspects are particularly strong elements of teacher-prep but are improving. In the best case the teacher and the supervisor are able to agree on the validity of the evidence even if they may have disagreements on the interpretation.
I see the parallels, Terry - thank you for making that connection. I also appreciate how you embrace the complexity of tenure and accountability. And yes to mutual agreement on what should count as evidence for evaluation! I appreciate your presence here. -Matt