As a student, I could definitely tell the deviation between a good teacher and a bad teacher. Good teachers, besides instruction, seemed like they wanted to be there; they liked united states of america and were invested in our learning. They were willing to observe new ways to explicate the material and so all of united states could learn. They got to know us as individuals and accepted our quirks. Bad teachers were only counting the days until retirement…and nosotros could tell.

The rubric they use for teacher evaluations oft doesn't reverberate these qualities, though. It's a checklist of behaviors (in my land, information technology seems mostly centered around making sure the standards are clearly displayed on a whiteboard) that puts lilliputian focus on the relationship between teacher and students, arguably the virtually important dynamic in whatever classroom.

One of the best teachers I had in middle and loftier school was a man who, for the sake of anonymity, we'll call Mr. Roll. The guy was pretty astonishing; many of united states who took his class went on to get teachers ourselves, which I recollect is a major tribute to him. However, if his teaching had to exist measured by current instructor evaluations, I worry that he'd be accounted a failure according to the criteria we're supposed to run into.

1. First of all, he was a chorus instructor.

I hateful, could he choose 2 fields more lacking in prestige than music and instruction? If you lot insist on pursuing a career in music, you'd better be a performer. And if you lot absolutely must teach, at least choose a STEM field…you lot know, something that matters. Being a chorus teacher is tantamount to announcing that information technology is worth pursuing what you dear regardless of salary, respect, or status. Is that really the message nosotros want to send our children?

Also, he was a male person chorus teacher. I'g sure at least a few boys in our small Southern town picked up the thought that information technology's okay for a guy to be more interested in the arts than in sports. Perhaps his demeanor even gave them the impression that strength is not the aforementioned equally assailment. You don't win championships with that mental attitude!

ii. Secondly, Mr. Roll lacked the emotional reserve required for a positive teacher evaluation.

He sometimes showed frustration or disappointment. One time or twice, I call up him wiping abroad tears after a particularly well-washed operation. If the ideal is a standardized, completely objective classroom focused only on skill development, he missed the bar.

3. Mr. Roll sometimes got off-topic in class.

Which I'thou sure doesn't help during an administrative observation. Half my memories of center schoolhouse chorus have niggling to do with time signatures or sight-reading. I retrieve dozens of stories from my instructor'south childhood. Oft, these stories centered effectually mistakes he fabricated or embarrassing setbacks he faced. They usually came up when a student was struggling or frustrated.

These stories taught a generation of kids about the value of a growth mindset, and the importance of being able to laugh at ourselves. They made us believe that even the worst students were not beyond redemption, and that failure could prepare us for eventual success. If some of my evaluators saw him didactics us valuable lessons about grapheme and perseverance instead of chromatic scales, well, they'd definitely question his priorities.

4. He was unapologetically homo.

He told stories of his by mistakes, and he best-selling his current ones. I even recall occasional apologies! A teacher is supposed to exist a professional, Mr. Curl. If we admit that we are capable of mistakes, what'south to keep students from questioning our say-so? Which brings me to my next point…

5. Mr. Roll failed to maintain strict boundaries between teacher and students.

We knew his fears and weaknesses. He joked around with us and nosotros felt comfy teasing him both in and exterior of class. (Including past using a certain nickname, for which I tardily apologize. Sorry, Mr. Roll!  And if you're not sure what I'k referring to, never mind. Information technology's nothing.) Especially in our loftier school years, my classmates and I were able to talk to Mr. Roll like a fellow man existence. For a few, he was a surrogate parent. I'm pretty sure that would bump him downward a peg or two in the "professionalism" section of the rubric.

six. He failed to achieve 100% proficiency for all students.

As evidenced by the fact that I still can't sing worth a damn. I mean, sure, I tin yet read a little music and I tin can enunciate like a boss, but enquire me to sing a standardized aria for a state criterion and you'll immediately regret information technology. Yous had one job to practise, Mr. Roll. One job.

I'm not certain Mr. Ringlet would have received the stellar evaluation he deserved. And, worse, I remember he passed his terrible habits on to a new generation of teachers. For case, I employ my own weaknesses and vulnerability to relate to students.  And I'yard more than likely to tell a story than to lecture when students act up in my grade, a failing I attribute directly to Mr. Roll. Don't tell my principal, just I occasionally prioritize my students' emotional needs over their academic progress. I've fifty-fifty been guilty of educational activity for growth, rather than mastery.

Maybe anytime I'll be the perfect automaton of a teacher, garnering directly Commendables on my evaluations. Until and so, I'll proudly join the ranks of failures, those of us who stumble blindly alongside our students rather than shouting orders from the hilltop. And I'll exist forever grateful to those who taught me to fail triumphantly.

Teacher-Eval_Pin