Alternatives to Stack Ranking Model for Appraisal of Teachers

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry has explored alternative performance appraisal models instead of the current stack ranking model for teachers; and (b) if so, what appraisal models has the Ministry considered.

Mr Speaker, MOE takes guidance from the Civil Service ranking and promotion framework for our staff performance appraisal and ranking processes. So, we adopt a system where a teacher’s performance is not just assessed by his own supervisor, but also cross-ranked with his peers by a ranking panel comprising direct and indirect supervisors. The system allows us to consistently identify and recognise stronger performing officers, while at the same time provide development opportunities to those who need more support to help them improve their performance. In addition, the system also helps to moderate differences in supervisors’ assessments and establish common standards of performance assessment.

We adopt a holistic approach in assessing our teachers. They are expected to be able to deliver effective teaching and pastoral care, support students in their character development, interact well with students and contribute to the learning of fellow teachers. Our teachers are also assessed on their ability to work and collaborate with others.

Apart from feedback from our School Leaders, MOE monitors key staff-related indicators like staff collaboration through our internal staff engagement surveys, and we do not find any particular concerns raised about our teachers not being able to collaborate with one another.

Singapore Secondary school teachers who participated in OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey 2018 said that beyond performance ratings, they receive feedback that has a positive impact on their teaching practices. In fact, they reported that the teaching fraternity here has a strong collaborative and collegial culture, driven by a shared belief in collective improvement of practice. About eight in 10 Singapore teachers reported that their schools have a collaborative school culture characterised by mutual support, shared responsibility, common beliefs about student learning and well-being, and an emphasis on innovation. 92% of our teachers also said that they can rely on one another, which is higher than the OECD average of 89%.

On balance, we find that a system of relative ranking of performance still serves its purpose today. While there are ranking guidelines to adhere to, there is also flexibility for deviations, taking into consideration the performance of individual officers and specific circumstances.

Nevertheless, MOE works with the Public Service Division, or PSD, to review our appraisal system periodically and has made refinements to the system over the years as our operating landscape changes.

We will also continue to work with PSD to study alternative systems of performance management so that we can ensure our system remains relevant and effective. Beyond the ranking guidelines or even the system of performance management that is in place, what is important is for our school leaders to continue motivating and inspiring our teachers to stay true to their calling as educators and help our students reach their full potential.

I thank the Minister for the reply and giving some of the survey results as well. But I want to make two points. One is that we actually have done away with class ranking because we said that learning is not a competition. Why then do we make teaching a competition? Does the Minister agree with me that by ranking teachers against each other, it might make them compete against each other and collaborate less as well. I know there are some survey results that show that a percentage feels that they can collaborate but I am just wondering whether ranking does help to move the needle towards making them compete against each other.

Two, can I ask whether MOE has studied this issue in terms of whether it benefits the students? So, does ranking the teachers actually benefit the students?

Mr Speaker, let me start by saying that we appreciate the work that our teachers do. Teaching is a very demanding job; it is a special calling. I know this from first-hand experience because my mother was a teacher for more than 40 years. So, let us make no pretence of it. It is demanding, and I would say it is probably more demanding now than it used to be.

But it is also vitally important in bringing out the best in every child and nurturing the next generation. That is why we spare no effort in building a first-rate teaching force, high quality and dedicated. We also do our very best to support them in their work.

I say this because we have to look at appraisal systems in this context. An appraisal system is meant to enhance teaching quality. Evidence around the world shows that having a good appraisal system can help in enhancing teaching quality. An OECD study said, for example, that "teacher appraisal can be a key lever for increasing the focus on teaching quality".

So, that is what we have been trying to do. It is not about competition amongst the teachers, but it is putting in place an appraisal system where there is focus on quality and where the school leadership teams can continually assess their teachers, and identify the excellent teachers amongst them who can be the next generation of school leaders and master teachers. I think that is important for maintaining that quality of our teaching force and also important in being able to nurture our next generation well.

We have been doing this for many years. We have an appraisal system that works reasonably well and we have, as a result of it, a strong high-quality teaching force. We will continue to review and improve the system, as I have said, based on feedback from all stakeholders and looking at experiences in other countries as well as best practices in other jurisdictions. Our fundamental objective is really to ensure a high quality teaching force and do the best for every child in our schools.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for an impassioned defence for the importance of appraisal which I think nobody disputes. Perhaps, the way to square this circle is to understand that maybe the concern is about ranking which potentially by its nature pits one teacher versus another.

I wonder if there could be a move toward more of a measurement system that does not rely on ranking per se but focuses more on teachers actually just having reached absolute standards. This does not penalise those who are very good teachers but may end up being ranked lower just by virtue of their peers being even better teachers.

Mr Speaker, as I had mentioned just now, our objective is to have a sound appraisal system that enhances teaching quality. How to go about designing this appraisal system? I think we have a system that works reasonably well, but I would be the first to acknowledge that it is not perfect. I do not think there are perfect solutions anywhere in the world. We constantly have to review and improve.

Even in the system of ranking that we have today, it has evolved over the years. We, for example, do not rigidly apply performance grade quotas anymore today; we allow flexibility and deviations, so we look at different circumstances. Ultimately, when we look at a performance system, the key objective is still, as I said earlier, for the school leadership teams to be able to identify excellent teachers amongst those who are under their charge. So, there is, in that selection, some form of ranking inevitably but the purpose is to be able to identify the high performing ones so that you can nurture them and put them up for advancement, and then they can in turn be the next generation of school leaders and master teachers.

We remain open with regard to new ideas and inputs on how this appraisal system can continue to be enhanced. But our objective, I think all of us here in this House share that same objective, is to have an appraisal system that is fair, enhances teaching quality and helps us to advance the next generation of school leadership so that we can continue to do the best for our students.

Thank you, Sir. I just want to reaffirm that I do agree that we should have an appraisal system as well. But could I ask the Minister, he mentioned earlier that MOE is studying alternative appraisal models. So, could the Minister share what some of these models are that MOE is currently studying?

It is an on-going process, Mr Speaker, because we continue to review this. It is not a specific review that we are doing now. Constantly, we exchange notes with jurisdictions elsewhere. We look at what Assoc Prof Jamus Lim had suggested too, on what is the balance between ranking versus having more absolute measures of performance. And then we also see some of the negative experiences in other jurisdictions where sometimes if you put too much weight on one indicator, then the teachers teach to that or perform to that indicator only, and then you end up with inadvertent consequences.

Like I said, there is no perfect appraisal system anywhere in the world. In the end, you have to keep on improving, reviewing, updating and being mindful of the potential downsides. So, the concerns raised by Members, that ranking and the appraisal systems that have elements of ranking can lead to the ill effects of competition, is something we are very mindful of. That is why in the way we appraise, we also look at how teachers collaborate with one another, in order to encourage that sort of behaviour.