Teacher Evaluation
A holistic teacher evaluation scheme would have to be formulated to enshrine all the states which are inclined towards a merit-pay system. While it is true that a teacher’s academic credentials and experience bear a positive correlation to his/her instructional effectiveness, the remuneration of teachers should not be merely anchored on this dock but rather on individual merit based on teacher performance – which can be gauged on scales of value addition to the learner’s progress. Capacity personnel development as in the training of evaluators and implementation of the evaluation exercise is costly; thus the federal government and individual states need to prioritize financing teacher evaluation exercises for any productive outcome to be realized. Such fiscal strength was the underlying factor behind the success of the pilot projects in Cincinnati and Hillsborough (Tyler, 2011, p. 1).
Although teacher evaluation systems are varied, they serve the common objective of assessing the instructor’s professional status along with the general teaching domains of maintaining professionalism, adequate planning and preparation prior to instruction and ensuring a thriving class environment. As such, the overall performance of students, as well as teachers, is greatly boosted by continuous teacher evaluation. This is basically due to the fact that, teacher evaluation advocates for student-centered mode of instruction, motivate both teachers and students alike by inculcating positive learning attitude and stirs teacher-student rapport, encourages a thriving and conducive learning environment through tentative class control mechanisms all of which are necessary ingredients for a dynamic and active class. In effect, teacher evaluation does not only act as a fundamental instrument for quality assurance in the education sector but also forms the basis of layoff measures for under-performing teachers on one hand and promotion for performing ones on the other.
Teacher Discipline
The teachers’ code of ethics enumerates the expected standard of the conduct of teachers in an educational setting; the performance of a teacher is therefore dependent on the extent to which he/she observes standardized rules, regulations and policies governing educational institutions. If a teacher does not comply with the expected regulations, it is within the administrative jurisdiction to initiate disciplinary measures to avert, correct or settle such a mishap. Generally, disciplinary action is enforced on those teachers whose conduct obstruct, and derail the effective performance of the educational institution of its core functionality. This may be in form of insubordination to the immediate authority, negligence of duty as it is the case with absence without leave, misappropriation and embezzlement of school funds/assets, perverted social and moral standing as evident in strained interpersonal relationships and substance abuse etcetera.
Apart from the general rules governing the official, social and moral conduct of teachers, legislators are formulating a bill that would institute teacher evaluation as an integral part of the disciplinary undertakings (Erickson, 2011, p. 1). Such teacher evaluation exercises unearth the inherent teacher performance features and expose the under-performing teachers. Value addition quest to students’ standardized test scores is the cornerstone of these valuations to guarantee effective education services to the populace.
With the help of human resource personnel, the administration follows the stipulated procedure of correcting the teacher to avert future misconduct. Some of the disciplinary measures which can be employed commensurate to the nature and magnitude of the misconduct are; formal or informal admonition, pay reduction, suspension, demotion and for severe misconducts; dismissal.
Teacher Dismissal
If the teacher has grievously violated the aforementioned rules and regulations, such disciplinary measures as a reprimand, pay reduction, suspension and demotion may not sufficiently avert the misconduct, then, the final alternative of result would be dismissal of the teacher from service. Key among the misconducts which might ultimately lead to dismissal from service are prolonged absence without leave, continued neglect of duties, embezzlement of school funds, substance abuse and moral decay.
Nonetheless, the administration must adhere to the stipulated dismissal procedures to ensure transparency and fairness. The principal/director would be required to issue a formal correspondence to the employee, specifying the reasons for dismissal; moreover, the employee would be accorded an ample opportunity to respond. As such, this spells the caution with which the administrators should take these cases, for, the discharge of a teacher should not be founded on unfounded segregations as differences in political disposition, nationality, sex, color, race or physical incapacity – for such would be a violation of the teacher’s professional and human rights. Thus, the teacher disciplinary departments must take note of the stipulated policies governing the varied processes towards appropriate disciplinary action. As such, not only should the disciplinary department conduct thorough research into alleged violations but also carry tentative scrutiny of various aspects which trigger friction in educational settings (Erickson, 2011, p. 1).
Commensurate to the violation committed by the teacher if it warrants dismissal, the director of the institution should; with the help of the human resource personnel, formally inform the teacher. The correspondence should clearly state the reason for the dismissal and it should bear with it also the fair opportunity of appealing to the superintendent.
Reference List
Erickson, etal. (2011). Employee Discipline. Web.
Tyler, J. (2011). Learning about Teacher Evaluation Systems. Web.