![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Written job descriptions. Written job descriptions provide teaching assistants and their supervisors with an explicit understanding of the assistants' responsibilities. (Appendix A lists some job titles and brief definitions and includes a few job descriptions from sites profiled in this volume.) Even in cases where the duties of paraprofessionals are well defined, however, discrepancies are sometimes noted between what the job description spells out and what paraprofessionals actually do. Other discrepancies have been observed between the job description and the professional development offered to carry it out. New ideas about how to support students' attainment of high academic standards involve many staff members in shifts of roles and responsibilities. Adjusting formal job descriptions in writing creates a record to which all affected staff members can refer when determining how well a role has been filled and whether training might be helpful.
Evaluation. In productive work environments, performance assessments are conducted regularly (at least annually), based on job descriptions, and linked with professional development opportunities. Such supervisors as principals or program administrators typically evaluate paraprofessionals, sometimes with input from the teachers who direct (and observe) the paraprofessionals' daily work. According to those who work extensively with teachers and paraprofessionals, this arrangement reinforces teamwork and preserves collegiality among teachers and support staff. Good schools and districts evaluate staff on how well they perform their assigned duties, and, if improvement is prescribed, they provide access to the appropriate inservice programs.
Much like concerns voiced by teachers are reports by many paraprofessionals that they do not receive regular or constructive evaluation. Furthermore, they say, the circumstances of their employment do not support the critical, data-based reflection on their own performance that many would prefer to outside evaluation. Programs profiled in this Idea Book and elsewhere present an array of evaluation options that might be used to support assessment. For example, materials from Los Angeles County's Developing a Partnership program include a team planning feedback form to promote a critical review of teacher and paraprofessional collaboration. Other teamwork assessment forms focus on allocating time in student lessons, identifying and extending areas of professional strength, and managing student behavior. In Louisiana, the paraprofessional training component of Calcasieu Parish's program for early childhood education videotapes participants' work with children. Participants then view the tapes to document mastery of skills or the need for improvement. In an article in the Teacher Educator, Green and Barnes (1988) recommend using a simple checklist of low-inference observation items so that supervisors and TAs would be provided with data relevant to discussions about the nature and content of their instructional support.
New forms of school organization and governance have revealed new approaches to evaluation that make a valuable addition to traditional methods. The message implicit in criticism of the present dearth of evaluation by both practitioners and researchers is that some form of feedback on professional performance would improve employment conditions for paraprofessionals.
Team building activities with certified personnel. Two reasons are often given for including classroom teachers in the planning and delivery of the paraprofessionals' inservice training: avoiding disparities between paraprofessionals' training and their actual experience with teachers, and enlightening teachers who have never worked with other adults in their classrooms.
Many believe that ideally, to ensure compatibility, teachers should participate in hiring the paraprofessionals who will work on their teams. However, this is not always possible, and, according to specialists in this area, the next best alternative is building the foundation for instructional team collaboration in an orientation meeting held before the paraprofessional starts work in the classroom. The Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (NREL, no date) recommends that at this meeting teachers should share information on their instructional strengths and weaknesses, pointing out areas where the paraprofessional can be of special service. As part of this meeting, or at a subsequent one, paraprofessionals should assess their own strengths and weaknesses and develop their personal expectations and goals.
Some districts allow paraprofessionals to serve on school improvement and site-based management teams. These districts report that building such representation into teams generates a more cohesive and collaborative climate for shared decisionmaking.
Training for the directing teachers. Most teacher education programs do not train teachers to direct the work of another adult in the classroom, nor do most school districts provide inservice training in this area. Thus, some teachers may feel ambivalent about working with a paraprofessional:
At first glance, a paraprofessional in the classroom might appear to be more trouble than help. The addition of another adult in the classroom who needs supervision, support, guidance, and a positive role may seem overwhelming. And if the paraprofessional is new to Title I or to education, then she or he may appear to be just one more burden for an already busy teacher. (NREL, no date, p. 5)
Several professional education programs offer teacher candidates modules or courses that focus on this dimension of classroom life. However, these courses most often target special education majors because so many states mandate the use of paraprofessionals on special education teams. Regular elementary and secondary education majors are seldom taught the relevant collaboration skills.
-###-
[Development of Effective Career Ladders]