Main page: 67 Final page: 77
The teaching assessment in Mexico: the case of Higher Middle Education[1]
Andrés Lozano -Medina[2]
Universidad Pedagogical Nacional, México
E-mail: alozano@upn.mx
Para citar este artículo /To reference this article /Para citar este artigo
Lozano-Medina, A. (2020). La evaluación docente en México: el caso de la Educación Media Superior. Revista Electrónica en Educación y Pedagogía, 4(7), pp-pp.67-77. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15658/rev.electron.educ.pedagog20.05040603
Received: febrero, 14 de 2020 /Reviewed: marzo, 11 de 2020 / Accepted: abril, 02 de 2020
Resumen: A partir de la creación del Servicio Profesional Docente (SPD) en 2013, a la evaluación que se aplica a los docentes de educación básica y media superior se le agregaron tres momentos laborales más que se refieren al ingreso, la permanencia y la promoción de los docentes y directivos, en este sentido, el objetivo de este documento es presentar avances en la sistematización de los resultados obtenidos por los docentes de educación media superior a través de las diversas evaluaciones realizadas por la instancia mencionada; lo anterior, a partir de la revisión documental de diversas fuentes para el tratamiento de la información y su valoración. Los resultados encontrados refieren que la profesionalización docente en los tres espacios laborales en que se lleva a cabo presenta serias limitaciones en lo logrado, considerando las diferentes evaluaciones; con ello es posible determinar que los resultados de estas evaluaciones no han logrado establecer indicadores que aseguren que la mejora de la calidad educativa, ofrecida en la educación media superior en México, sea posible en los términos señalados por la política educativa vigente debido a que los docentes no han superado los indicadores solicitados por el SPD.
Palabras clave: Docentes, evaluación, política educativa (Tesauro); Educación Media Superior (Palabras clave del autor).
The teaching assessment in Mexico: the case of Higher Middle Education
Abstract: Since the creation of the Professional Teaching Service (SPD) in 2013, three items were added to the teachers’ evaluation that is implemented in elementary and secondary education regarding on one hand, teachers’ entrance and tenure and on the other hand, teachers and managers’ promotion. Thus, the goal of this document is to present progress in the systematization of results obtained by secondary school teachers through several evaluations carried out by the SPD; based on the document review of several sources to process and assess information. The results showed that teachers’ professionalization had serious limitations, considering the different evaluations; it is possible to determine that the results have failed to establish indicators that ensure the improvement in educational quality, offered in secondary education in Mexico, this is possible in the terms included in the current education policy because teachers have not exceeded the indicators requested by the SPD.
Keywords: Teachers, evaluation, educational policy (Thesaurus); high school Education (Author's keywords).
Resumo: Desde a criação do Serviço Profissional de Ensino (SPD) em 2013, mais três momentos de trabalho foram somados edução básica y media superior se le à avaliação que se aplica aos professores do ensino fundamental e superior que se relacionam com a renda, a permanência e a promoção de professores e gestores, nesse sentido, o objetivo deste documento é apresentar avanços na sistematização dos resultados obtidos pelos professores do ensino médio superior através das diversas avaliações realizadas pelo órgão supracitado,; o acima, com base na revisão documental de várias fontes para o processamento de informações e sua avaliação. Os resultados encontrados referem-se ao fato de que a profissionalização docente nos três espaços de trabalho em que é realizado tem sérias limitações no que foi alcançado, considerando as diferentes avaliações; com isso é possível determinar que os resultados dessas avaliações não conseguiram assegurem estabelecer indicadores que garantam que a melhoria da qualidade educacional, oferecida no ensino médio superior no México, seja possível nos termos indicados pela atual política educacional, pois os professores não ultrapassaram os indicadores solicitados pelo SPD
Palavras clave: Professores, avaliação, política educacional (Thesaurus); Ensino Médio Superior.
Introduction
Since its inception in 2008, the Integral Reform of Middle Education (RIEMS) has set high targets for teacher preparation and evaluation, one of them was to ensure that at the end of 2009-2010 school year all teachers enrolled in an institution affiliated to the Undersecretariat of Middle Education (SEMS) were trained in the Teacher Education Program of Secondary Education (PROFORDEMS) (Agreement 447, no. 5). However, three years later the Federal Audit Office (ASF) revealed that the goals for teacher training program established by RIEMS had barely met.
According to the records taken from the program database, in 2011, 24,844 teachers were qualified and trained, making 74.3% (71,771 teachers) less than reported in the Indicators Matrix (MIR), which reported 96,615 qualified and trained teachers (ASF, s.f., p. 8).
In addition, Guzman, Diaz, and Soto (2017) expressed the following:
(...) the expectations of the PMI (2008e), at the time, were quite optimistic, as they sought to train 20,000 teachers in that year, then, 60 thousand more in 2009 and incorporate the remaining 160 thousand in the following two years, to finish with a total of 240 thousand teachers who were part of the secondary school staff, a goal that was far from fulfilled, because in 2013, 56.2% had barely been trained (p. 153).
In this regard, the official information shows that after seven years of operation of the Reform, some achievements have been made during the 2013-2014 school year, SEP mentions that "through PROFORDEMS 27,020 teachers were trained, plus the 75,343 trained in the previous cycles, allowed to cover 56.2% of the total number of teachers at public institutions" (Secretariat of Public Education - SEP, 2014, p. 212)
Building a synthesis based on what has been done in the first school cycles until 2016 and on the information provided by former Secretary of Education Rodolfo Tuirán (2018), between 2008 and 2016 PROFORDEMS has trained 110,796 teachers after eight calls, this number was better than the expectation raised initially, a very significant deficit in the number of trained teachers and the time spent to achieve it. As of teachers’ certification process between 2009 and 2017, also in eight calls, 61,955 teachers were certified, however, in this case the number of certified teachers was more deficient.
So far, it is shown the progress that has been made, which in general terms, it is little significant and far from the goals established at the beginning of the Reformation, in this sense Guzmán, Díaz and Soto (2017) express that “the development of the teaching staff does not constitute a priority for the reform itself or for the educational authorities".”.
However, in 2013 there was a significant change in the field of education through the efforts and promulgation of an Educational Reform that involved the modification of 3rd Article. This article establishes different ways of interacting among different participants in the educational event, particularly in the case of teachers of primary and higher education in which the most relevant change was the evaluation process that was implemented through the entry, tenure and promotion of teachers and managers.
To carry out these evaluation process, the National Coordination of Professional Teaching Service was created on November 14th, 2013, as a decentralized administrative body of the Secretariat of Public Education, with technical, operational and management autonomy (DOF, 2013)..
Currently, despite the derogation of the 2013 Education Reform and the constitutional modification of 3rd Article, it is still indicated in the General Law of the System for the Teachers’ Career (LGSCMM) it is the Secretariat’s obligation "to establish, in coordination with the competent educational authorities, the timetable for selection processes such as admission, promotion and recognition”” (LGSCMM, Art. 14, Fraction XII., 2019). As a result, the teaching evaluation process continues, but the current meaning of the evaluation does not consider the previous conditions such as the punitive nature in which the 2018 concluded administration was characterized.
Methodology
The research study was descriptive; thus, it limits the search for information on the current state of the study, in this sense the methodological strategy to meet the objectives set out in the research, consisted in monitoring the information in several sources. Although analytical indicators were created that would account for the progress made in the training of teachers of higher education; these indicators lack of solid data at the moment of answering less general questions, as these information are dispersed in different government institutions such as the former National Institute for Education Evaluation (INEE), the Federal Audit Office (ASF), the Secretariat of Public Education (SEP), it is also necessary to consider both official information and the information given by public workers who were in charge of managing higher education, and finally the information generated in the National Coordination for Teaching Professional Service (CNSPD).
Thus, this is the base of an idea that is being reconstructed, objectives are proposed and a theoretical framework is defined to comply with the goals established in this research that refers to obtain - through database review and the exploration of specialized literature - information to determine the progress in the process of teachers and managers evaluation considering the implementation of the Professional Teaching System in three areas of interest: the entry, tenure and promotion of teachers in the subsystem of high school education in Mexico.
Results and discussion
Beyond the importance of teacher qualification to improve the teaching-learning process in the classroom, what is relevant in this study are the results achieved by teachers in their training process. This is above because the evaluation has been seen, from an official perspective, as an element that should be useful to improve the quality of education, according to the INEE (2015, p. 52) the evaluation of teachers and managers is a fundamental tool to improve students’ learning.
In this way, it is a complex issue that contains multiple factors that influence the educational process; when assessing the teaching performance based on the indicators this procedure or process has, depending on the perspective it is intended to achieve. Therefore, it is important to know if teachers meet or not a series of criteria to be considered, using official terminology, as suitable or not suitable in the case of not complying with the indicators, and on the other hand, to link what is learned in a training process to the common teaching practice in a particular context, thus, evaluation is understood as "these are social constructions that articulate the knowledge, skills and values that teachers must perform in their practice, lowering expectations about what is considered an effective and professional teaching"” (Leyva y Guerra, 2015, p. 43).
Some results of the evaluation of EMS educators
The way to grade the results of the evaluations is presented in the document Basic Criteria for Qualifying Teachers, published by the Teaching Professional Service (SPD), and it proposes the following.
(...) to report the results of the participants, the raw score (number of right anwers) achieved in each evaluation instrument will not be used, but a scale, common to all instruments, that allow comparison of the scores they obtain in the different exams they submit. On this scale, the range goes from 60 to 170 points, the cut-off point to reach Performance Level II is, in all cases, 100 points. (SEP, 2015b, 1).
In this way, the first NI level is an Insufficient result. It means that the teacher did not pass the criterion of the first cut-off point, and means that s/he does not have the necessary minimum knowledge or skills evaluated by the instrument; NII means that the result is sufficient, it means the teacher exceeded the criterion proving to have the minimum indispensable knowledge or skills evaluated in the instrument; and NIII indicates that the participant obtained a higher score and this result is satisfactory with respect to the knowledge or skills evaluated.
New entry assessment. The evaluation in which teachers of high school education were subjected for admission consisted of three instruments: the Disciplinary Knowledge Examination (ECD), the Teacher Skills Examination (EHD) and the Class Plan (PC) (INEE, 2018, p. 194)
The result achieved by teachers who sought to enter the Teaching Professional Service (SPD) in 2017 considering the three instruments discussed, does not appear to be entirely favorable. It is noted in Figure 1, that about 50%of teachers achieve level II of qualification, i.e. They reach 100 points on the scale built for evaluation, however, the remaining 50% descended to insufficient results, on average a third of those who participated in the exam achieved level I and those who achieve level III are the lowest percentage.
Figure1. Percentage of participants per level of performance in each instrument in competitions for entry into the SPD in high school education, 2017.
Source: own authorship along with INEE information (2018).
A comparison of the overall results obtained by new-entry teachers in school during 2014-15 and 2017-18 shows that the grades achieved by the teachers evaluated are insufficient; year after year the increase of those who were qualified as suitable is tangential, going from 24.6% in 2014-15 school year to 33.6% in the 2017-18 cycle, this indicates at least two issues, the first is that the training processes are not giving the expected results, that is, the trained teachers do not have a proper knowledge in their teaching skills and in didactic planning; the second is the lack of precision of the data provided by the former sub-secretary as it only indicates the appropriate value (see Figure 2).
Figure2. New Entry Teacher Assessment Results School Cycles 2014-15 to 2017-18
Source: Tuirán, R. (2018). Advances in higher middle education, 2012-2017. Mexico: SEP. p. 117.
This indicates a lack of clarity about the level of performance achieved by teachers. For the SPD (2019) those participants with an ideal result in the evaluation process will be the ones who obtain at least the performance level II (N II) in all the evaluation instruments according to the contest guidelines. Apparently, there are only two result options, those who pass the exams are qualified as suitable and those who fail are not suitable, but this information is not entirely correct since in the group of participants who pass the exams are distributed by performance group as seen in the Table 1.
Table 1.
Performance groups for teachers of the disciplinary component
|
Distribution of exams and performance levels |
Number of exams |
Groups and order of entry into the prioritized lists |
||
|
Level I |
Level II |
Level III |
||
|
- |
- |
3 |
3 |
1. Group A |
|
- |
1 |
2 |
3 |
2. Group B |
|
- |
2 |
1 |
3 |
3. Group C |
|
- |
3 |
- |
3 |
4. Group D |
|
1 |
- |
2 |
3 |
Do not enter the prioritized list |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
|
|
1 |
2 |
- |
3 |
|
|
2 |
- |
1 |
3 |
|
|
2 |
1 |
- |
3 |
|
|
3 |
- |
- |
3 |
|
Source: SPD (Basic criteria for qualifying supporters 2019)
There are important differences to be qualified as an ideal teacher, that is, it is not the same thing to have three exams at level III as to have three exams at level II, the first belongs to group A of preference while the second belongs to group D. However, all applicants who enter to high school education are suitable teachers to the extent that they do not obtain qualification at level I. In this way, Figure 2 presents generic results, in which it is not possible to classify the teachers considered as suitable in a group.
According to the results obtained by new entry teachers, it is clear that they do not have the skills and knowledge necessary to achieve an educational practice capable of generating a quality training process among students. The problem is present even in disciplinary knowledge indicating poor training in professional studies, this situation happens in other training spaces or there is no agreement between what is taught in the higher education institutions and what is expected in the assessment of new entry teachers.
Evaluation of teaching performance. Teaching performance undoubtedly involves approaching a multifactorial concept as it has to do with aspects such as the development of certain practices carried out by the teacher with a group of students, in a specific context and with certain standards dictated by the institution in which they work and mediated by an educational policy, in this way the teaching performance can be understood as:
(...) the process of mobilizing their professional skills, their personal disposition and their social responsibility to: articulate meaningful relationships between the components that impact the training of students; participate in educational management; strengthen a democratic institutional culture, and intervene in the design, implementation and evaluation of local and national educational policies, to promote students’ learning and development of skills and skills for life (Martínez y Lavín, 2017, p. 2).
Conducting an evaluation of this process is clearly somewhat complex, therefore, for this purpose, the Coordination of the Teaching Professional Service intends to carry out four evaluation steps: a) a compliance report with professional responsibilities, b) evidence dossier, c) an up-to-date knowledge and teaching evaluation that accredits learning skills (two exams) and d) the didactic planning presented. (SEP, 2015a).
In order to qualify of this field, five evaluation items are established with minimum and maximum scores as shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Criteria to be part of a performance group in High School Education Evaluation Result: Performance Groups
|
Evaluation result |
Overall score on scale 800 - 1,600 |
|
Insufficient |
Less than 1,000 points |
|
Enough |
1,000 to 1,199 points |
|
Well |
1,200 to 1,399 points |
|
Interest |
1,400 to 1,499 points |
|
Excellent |
At least 1,500 points |
Source: OWN authorship based on SPD (Basic criteria for qualifying supporters 2019)
Considering these items, the results of the evaluation to participants during the cycles 2015-16 to 2017-18 are in deficit; those who did not reach the minimum score of 1000 points to get an insufficient grade were during the first period (17.7%); then, it was significantly reduced in the next cycle by moving to 5.9% but rebounded in the next cycle to 14.8%.
Considering now the group of participants who achieved insufficient and sufficient qualification, that is, those who were in an interval between 800 points and 1199, the numbers observed are high for the first school year reaching 47.7%, 31.9% for the second and 32.5% for the latter, which represents a decrease but maintains a high proportion.
Figure 3. Teaching Performance Assessment Results, School Cycles 2015-16 to 2017-18.
Own authorship in collaboration with Elizabeth Jerónimo Guzmán based on statistics published by the National Coordination of the Teaching Professional Service (CNSDP). Recovered fromhttp://servicioprofesionaldocente.sep.gob.mx/portal-docente-2014-2018/ms/permanenciadocentes/estadisticas/
Taking into account those who achieved excellent values, i.e., between 1500 and 1600 total points expected, they represent a very low proportion: 2.9%, 3.8% and 1.7% for each school year of the total supporters. This information is shown in Figure 3.
The official means do not accurately indicate the minimum qualification that teachers must achieve in terms of skills and knowledge to perform a practice with the required quality standards in order to achieve the expected learning. It is obvious that those who achieve an excellent result must have the necessary indicators to carry out a quality practice, so it is also for teachers who achieved insufficient qualification who do not have the knowledge and skills necessary to do so. However, the other qualifications remain uncertain because there is no information about the elements or knowledge in which the deficiencies are available, that is, whether or not they are able to perform a teaching practice that guarantees the expected educational quality; simply put, will teachers who have a sufficient qualification carry out a quality practice? How far are the cognitive and operational dimensions from the teachers who achieved an excellent qualification?
Teacher promotion evaluation. The evaluation that promoted the 2013 Reform was clearly aimed at meeting three aspects: the entry, teaching performance and teachers promotion. So far, the results of the first two aspects have been presented and these show unfavorable conditions to consider, because based on the official evaluation criteria, high school education in Mexico has the most qualified human resources to achieve the educational quality posed in the aforementioned Reform.
Now, the results of the evaluation that correspond to teachers’ promotion are also not encouraging, according to Tuirán (2018) stated that: "14,540 teachers have been evaluated for promotion to management functions, 6,377 were suitable" (p. 117). However, it should be clarified that the information maintains the same lack of precision prior to valuing the participants as suitable based on the issues mentioned before.
If its cited only the information which corresponds to the total number of teachers evaluated in school years ranging from 2014-15 to 2017-18, it is obtained, in the first instance, that 43.9% of the participants achieved a promotion, this was a higher proportion than in the previous case, however, if it is analyzed by school year, the situation changes slightly.
As for the first cycle, the participants who managed to be suitable correspond to 22.4%, during the second cycle 31.0%, in the third cycle there was a slight increase that reached 33.4% and during the last period the percentage slightly decreased to 28.7%; in short, by separating the results presented in Figure 4 these are not so satisfactory. Finally, the mean value is 28.8%, a percentage away from the initial 43.8% highlighted by the educational authority.
Figure 4. Teaching evaluation results promotion, school cycles 2014-15 to 2017-18.
Source: Tuiran, R. (2018). Advances in higher middle education, 2012-2017. Mexico: SEP, p. 117.
The situation shown here raise concerns, as it is about the evaluation of teachers seeking to be promoted, that is, they also have the knowledge acquired in the training courses with a lot of experience in teaching practice, as well as a significant seniority in the service that should provide favorable elements for the evaluation. However, those aspects are not included in the information provided by the official institutions.
Conclusions
The evaluation taken by participants to enter as educators in high school education, to those who are already in practice and seek to remain and finally, those who want to promote themselves in their current activity, organized by the Secretariat of Public Education through the Teaching Professional Service and endorsed by the National Institute for Education Evaluation, has shown that most applicants and active teachers do not meet the objectives established in the evaluation. This may indicate that teachers for some reason are not trained or have sufficient abilities and skills to perform teaching practices that lead to quality education, this situation clearly attributes responsibility for improvement especially to the practice developed by teachers. According to my view, it seems to be totally incorrect.
Based on the previously mentioned, I support what has been stated in the Chamber of Deputies in the initiative with draft decree to issue the General Law of Education, published in the Parliamentary Gazette on July 18, 2019, which states:
INNE did not have a methodology to establish comprehensive evaluation models that defined benchmarks and articulated the components, processes, and results of the NSS. So, it was not possible to identify the extent to which the results of one component have any effect on the rest, nor how they, in turn, can be interpreted together. The lack of an articulated analysis of the results in the different evaluations prevents us from knowing how these, within the framework of the SNEE (National Educational Assessment System), contribute to the improvement of educational quality (Parliamentary Gazette, 2019, 14).
In this way, the results presented do not consider the context and conditions of teachers of high school education, by applying homogeneous tests to different applicants who might have unequal experience, working age, different and uncertain working and contractual conditions in many cases, different disciplinary training received and the absence of teaching training. It necessary to remember that the teaching staff in this level of education is made up of professionals who were not normal-school teachers, which means that they do not have vocational training knowledge of didactics or educational planning. Zorrilla (2012) presents it as follows:
(...) the current teaching staff is inadequately prepared, because of the lack of teaching and didactic skills during their training, which usually comprises a university career and having attended, in the case of the most experienced teachers, training courses that EMS institutions have been providing for several decades (Zorrilla. p. 122).
Therefore, it can be argued that the existence of training programs such as those offered through the Teacher Training Program for High School Education (PROFORDEMS) are not sufficient because this training and updating process do not fulfill the teaching needs when offering generic courses.
Besides, the evaluation does not consider the context elements for greater details around the type of results achieved by teachers, it only provides partial information on standardized results, this might be a line of research that should be explored to incorporate in the evaluation process cultural, social, economic, and political aspects of those evaluated. Thus, it is possible to broaden the focus on the participants involved in the evaluation. Therefore, the evaluation process must undoubtedly count on the participation of the person to be evaluated, otherwise the information will be kept biased and incomplete.
It is expected that the new administration that derogated the Article 3rd promotes what they call the New Mexican School and considers that teachers’ evaluation is carried out in a professional way and take into account the similarities and differences of teachers, their work and professional environments.
Referencias
Auditoria Superior de la Federación. (s/f). Formación de docentes de la Educación Media Superior. México.
Diario Oficial de la Federación. (30 de septiembre de 2019). Ley General del Sistema para la carrera de las maestras y los maestros. México, México. Recuperado el 15 de noviembre de 2019
DOF. (2013). DECRETO por el que se crea la Coordinación Nacional del Servicio Profesional Docente. México: DOF.
Gaceta Parlamentaria. (18 de julio de 2019). Iniciativa con Proyecto de Decreto de la Ley Genaral de Educación. México, México.
Guzmán M., F., Díaz O., G.y Soto M., G.B. (2017). El desarrollo de la planta docente propuesto por la RIEMS. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos, XLVIII(2), 137-164. Recuperado el 12 de noviembre de 2019
INEE. (2015). Política nacional de evaluación de la educación. Mx: INEE.
INEE. (2018). La educación obligatoria en México. Informe 2018. México: INEE.
Leyva B. Y. y Guerra G., M. (Septiembre-diciembre de 2015). Evaluación del desempeño docente. RED Revista de evaluación para docentes y directivos(2), 39-55.
Martínez R. S. I. y Lavín G. J.L. (2017). Aproximación al concepto de desempeño docente, una revisión conceptual sobre su delimitación. Ponencia de XIV Congreso Nacional de Investigación Educativa (págs. 1-11). San Luis Potosí, México: COMIE.
SEP. (29 de Octubre de 2008). Acuerdo 447 por el cual se establecen las competencias docentes. Diario Oficial. México.
SEP. (2014). 2° Informe de gobierno. México: SEP.
SEP. (2015 a). Etapas, aspectos, métodos e instrumentos. Proceso de la evaluación al desempeño docente. EMS. México: Coordinación Nacional del Servicio Profesional Docente.
SEP. (23 de febrero de 2015 b). Sistema Nacional del Servicio Profesional Docente. Recuperado el 11 de junio de 2019, de http://servicioprofesionaldocente.sep.gob.mx/portal-docente-2014-2018/ba_e/ingreso/criterios_basicos/
Servicio Profesional Docente. (5 de febrero de 2019). Sistema Nacional de registro. Obtenido de Criterios básicos para calificar a los sustentantes: servicioprofesionaldocente.sep.gob,mx/portal-docente-2014-2018/ms/ingreso_2018/criterior_basicos/
Tuirán, R-. (2018). Avances en la educación media superior, 2012-2017. México: SEP.
Zorrilla, A., J.F. (2012). La secretaria de Educación pública y la conformación histórica de un sistema nacional de educación media superior. En M. M. Espinosa, La educación media superior en México. Balance y perspectivas. (págs. 17-129). México: SEP-FCE.