Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PERFORMANCE APPRAISALIN THE EDUCATIONAL SETTING
• What is it expected to accomplish?• The organizational context explained• Purpose • Develop a model of the process • Ethical aspects• Performance Appraisal process and
Human Resources
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:What does it accomplish?
• Performance appraisal assesses an employee’s ability to perform assigned job duties within the organizational setting
THE CONTEXT OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
• Most states mandate assessment of districts, schools and children due to the emphasis on accountability
• Performance of public school districts and their students is dependent on performance of employees
THE CONTEXT OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
• Appraisals must be done on a continuing basis in order for the U.S. to maintain its global position in the world economy
• Employees have legislative protection within the appraisal process (depending on the purpose of and outcomes of the appraisal)
PURPOSES OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEMS
• COMPENSATION: merit vs. award based on performance
• EMPLOYMENT CONTINUATION: probationary and continuing contract employees
• DEVELOPMENT: to enhance the job performance of employees by identifying weaknesses or strengths
STANDARDS OF COMPARISONS FOR
PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS• Norm-referenced system –
comparing performance of one employee to that of another:
• Useful to determine awards or highest performance of individuals and for reduction of workforce
Standards of Comparison
• Criterion-referenced: compares the performance of an employee against preestablished standards
• Useful for decisions regarding employment continuation, merit pay decisions
Standards of Comparison
• Self-referenced: focuses on the job behavior of an employee
• Strengths and weaknesses may be identified with this system
• Well suited for development of job skills
Evaluation Systems
• Ranking systems:
1 – Forced distribution: similar to grading on the curve by grouping employees of the basis of their relative performance
2 – Simple ranking: most frequently used; ranking of employees from highest to lowest
3 – Alternate ranking: rank the first highest performer, then second the lowest performer – repeat this process with the remaining employees
Ranking Systems
4 – Paired comparison: job performance of each employee is contrasted to that of all other employees on individual basis
Rating Systems
• Most frequently used• Criterion-referenced and provides an
absolute level of job performance
1 – Checklist: behaviors are marked that are characteristic of employee’s behavior
2 – Graphic rating: anchored by numerals (e.g., 1-7) or by adverbs beginning with “never” and ending with “always” or “unsatisfactory” ending with “exceptional”
Narrative Systems• Self-referenced and focus on individual as an employee• Tailored to meet individual objective or that of an
organization
1 – Work diaries: on-the-job behaviors are cataloged, giving descriptive information
2 – Goal-setting techniques: future oriented; preestablished objectives between employee and employer
3 – Individual portfolios: most recent technique; compiled by the employee with samples of work performed and outcomes attributed to the performance
Evaluation Models
• Multiple-cutoff model: appropriate when specific diagnostic information regarding employee is required; each performance dimension is viewed in either relative or absolute sense
• Compensatory model: information regarding performance on all job dimensions is combined to form a composite measure of performance
• Eclectic model: combines multiple-cutoff and compensatory models; a minimum competence is required
Reliability
• Within performance assessment context, defined as either a coefficient of stability or coefficient of consistency
Coefficient of stability: assesses how reproducible results of performance appraisal are across time;
Requires performance process to be performed two different times by the same appraiser.
Reliability
• Coefficient of consistency: requires only a single administration of the performance appraisal process
• Without reliability, a performance assessment process can not be valid…
Validity
• Validity for a performance appraisal process are concerned with how well the process performs relative to the intended purpose of the procedure.
• The purpose of a performance appraisal is to make merit awards to employees, it is assumed that the process can distinguish between exceptional employees and all other employees.
Validity
• Content Validity – only type of validity that is analytically determined. Relies on the subjective opinions of a panel of experts. Experts are defined as individuals possessing in-depth knowledge about the content purported and measured by said process.
• Construct Validity – is empirically determined. Construct validity is inferred on the basis of empirical evidence gathered through several procedures.
Performance Appraisal Process
Phase 1: Appraisee – Appraiser Planning Conference
–Enable the appraiser and the appraisee to inform and to become informed about the process–Clarify for the appraisee the organizations expectations for the position.–Elucidate any differences between present and desired levels of job performance–Establish future performance expectations–Allow the appraiser and appraisee to influence each other in planning the appraisal process
Phase 2: Performance Analysis
Employee and employer conduct a performance appraisal
Three Main Purposes1. Assist the employee in analyzing present
performance2. Provide information for a progress review
conference with the appraiser3. Help employee identify strengths, weaknesses,
and potential, and room for improvement
Phase 3: Performance Progress ReviewOften referred to as the post appraisal
interview. Purposes
1. Review performance2. Clarify viewpoints (goals, responsibilities,
authority, relationships, progress)3. Self Development (personal objectives)
Development of an Action Program
• Performance appraisal reports should indicate how well the appraisee has done in reaching previously established performance and behavior targets.
• On the basis of the progress review conference, both parties come to a common understanding on what performance targets should be reestablished for the next review period.
• During the period set for the individual development program, the appraiser has primary responsibility for guiding and motivating the behavior of the appraisee to achieve performance targets
Principal’s Responsibilities: Termination, Suspension, Dismissal and Reinstatement of Instructional
Staff• New employees: Initial contract includes
97-day probationary period (without cause for termination)
• Professional Service Contract: termination may result if employee is informed of performance deficiencies and not corrected during the subsequent year.
Principal Responsibilities, cont.
• Employee must be afforded opportunity to review the determination of unsatisfactory review.
• Employee may request opportunity to transfer.
• Subsequent year, employee must be provided assistance/training opportunities to improve deficiencies and be periodically evaluated to assess progress.
Principal Responsibilities, cont.
• Employee must receive in writing regarding correction of deficiencies (not later than 6 weeks prior to close of subsequent year).
• If not corrected, superintendent may notify in writing of non-renewal of contract.
• Employee may contest and demand a hearing.
• District school board has final say regarding sufficiency of grounds for termination.
Principal Responsibilities, cont.
• Continuing contract - may be suspended or dismissed at any time during school year.
• Charges must be based on immorality, misconduct in office, incompetency, gross insubordination, willful neglect of duty, drunkenness, or conviction of crime involving moral turpitude (as defined by State Board of Education).
Principal Responsibilities, cont.
• District may suspend charged employee without pay.
• May be reinstated and back salary paid if charges are not sustained.
• Sustained charges – district will determine to either dismiss or fix the terms under which employee may be reinstated.
• Contract will be cancelled if majority vote of board sustains charges.
Ten Judicial “Commandments” for Legally
Sound Teacher Evaluation• 1 – Make a good faith effort to
implement all procedures and processes associated with the formal evaluation policy.
• 2 – Use evaluation criteria that are valid and observable.
• 3 – Inform the teacher of evaluation criteria in advance of the observation.
Ten “Commandments”• 4 – Provide timely notice of specific
deficiencies that are related to the predetermined evaluation criteria.
• 5 – Utilize observations and evaluations by several trained evaluators to confirm any discovered deficiencies.
• 6 – Develop a plan of remediation that is related to identified deficiencies.
Ten “Commandments”, cont.
• 7 – Allow a reasonable period of time to complete the plan of remediation.
• 8 – Use anecdotal records and formal reports of complaints to supplement the performance evaluation.
• 9 – Apply the evaluation system in a uniform manner.
• 10 – Avoid using the evaluation system to retaliate against the employee for that employee’s exercise of free speech.
Fifteen Tips for Better Documentation of Employee
Performance1. Emphasize with your staff the importance
of employee documentation.2. Train your staff on proper documentation.3. Avoid fighting words.4. Avoid the “cc” syndrome.5. Treat everything you write as if it might
appear on the front page of the New York Times.
Fifteen Tips
6. Remember that sometimes what really counts is what you don’t say.
7. Use documentation in both a positive and negative manner.
8. Come to conclusion.9. Consider the need for
documentation prior to reducing your thoughts to writing.
Fifteen Tips, cont.
10.Beware of the evils of e-mail/internet.
11.Do not document in a fit of anger.12.Use common vocabulary.13.Be specific.14.Focus on the present.15.Follow the Golden Rule.
Sources
• Horner, J. Education Law Into Practice: Fifteen Tips for Better Documentation of Employee Performance.
• Beckham, J.D., Ph.D. Education Law Into Practice: Ten Judicial “Commandments” for Legally Sound Teacher Evaluation.
• Young, I.P. & Castetter, W.B. (2004). The Human Resource Function in Educational Administration: Eighth Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Resources
• http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes• Klein, T.J. (1990, May). Performance
reviews that rate an A. Personnel, 67(5), 38-41.
• Sawyer, L. (2001, February). Revamping a teacher evaluation system. Educational Leadership, 58(5), 44-47.
• Werther, W.B., Jr. (1993). Human resources and personnel management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
