Teachers’ Perspectives on Evaluation Reform

7/30/2019 Teachers Perspectives on Evaluation Reform

1/52

Teachers Perspectives on

Evaluation ReformMorgaen L. Donaldson December 2012

WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.O


2/52


3/52

Teachers Perspectives onEvaluation Reform

Morgaen L. Donaldson December 2012


4/52


5/52

1 Introduction and summary

7 Teacher evaluation: An overview

9 Study setting

13 Study methodology

15 Study findings

27 Reported influence on teachers practice

33 Limited impact on pedagogy

37 Recommendations

31 Conclusion

43 About the author and acknowledgements

45 Endnotes

Contents


6/52


7/52

Introduction and summary | www.americanprogress.

Introduction and summary

O all school acorsrom exended learning opporuniies o amily and com-

muniy engagemen o smaller class sizeseachers exer he larges impac on

suden achievemen.1 Wha was once ervenly believed by praciioners and

parens bu quesioned by researchers is now a well-esablished ac: eachers

make a crucial dierence in sudens academic perormance. Despie his realiy,

eors o improve eacher qualiy hrough perormance evaluaion have made

litle ground. Te consequences o evaluaion have generally been negligible in

erms o eachers insrucional improvemen or coninued employmen. Tereis scan evidence ha evaluaion has improved he qualiy o eachers classroom

insrucion or led o he dismissal o underperorming eachers.2

Despie is less han sellar rack record, eacher evaluaion has aken cener sage

in recen eors o reorm public schools in he Unied Saes. In he Obama

adminisraions 2009 Race o he op compeiive gran program, or example,

he ederal governmen avored saes ha permited he use o suden es scores

in eacher evaluaions. In shor order, 17 saes changed heir laws o permi or

require he inclusion o such daa in 2009 or 2010, wih eigh more ollowing sui

in 2011.3 In addiion o rying o increase eacher accounabiliy wihin eacher

evaluaion, policymakers have ried o bolser he insrucional improvemen

aspec o eacher evaluaion. I is clear ha many disrics and saes will incorpo-

rae no only suden achievemen bu also increased coaching in eacher evalua-

ion in he coming years.

Despie growing momenum o reorm eacher evaluaion in order o increase is

impac on eachers pracice and persisence in he proession, very litle research

examines how curren reorms inuence eachers atiudes or repored insruc-

ional pracices. Do he new evaluaion sysems lead o enhancemens in eachersinsrucion overall? And are here real consequencespenaliesor persisenly

underperorming eachers? Are here rewards or hose whose insrucion is con-

sisenly ousanding?


8/52

2 Center or American Progress | Teacher s Perspectives on Eval uati on Reorm

o answer hese and oher quesions relaed o eacher evaluaion, we conduced a

small-scale sudy ha sough o provide evidence o inorm he debae among poli-

cymakers on how eacher evaluaion should be changed o yield he greaes impac.

Tis repor provides ndings based on a sudy conduced in one norheasern,

urban, and medium-sized school disric, which we will call Sudyville o mainaincondenialiy. A leader in eacher-evaluaion reorm, Sudyville4 implemened

a new sysem in 2010he eacher Evaluaion Program, or EP, which evalu-

aes eachers based on heir sudens growh on academic perormance measures

and more convenional observaion-based daa. Tis repor presens he views o

eachers on he disrics evaluaion reorm and he exen o which i has aeced

heir insrucional pracice. I is based on inerviews conduced wih 92 educaors,

including eachers and school leaders during he 20112012 school year, which was

he evaluaion programs second year o exisence. Tis repor ocuses on how he

experiences and views o eachers diered according o heir evaluaion raingra-

ings which ranged rom a low o 1 (needs improvemen) o a high o 5 (exemplary).

In general he eachers in his sudy viewed he disrics new eacher-evaluaion

program more posiively han negaively, alhough a subsanial minoriy o each-

ers said ha hey would no recommend he evaluaion program o oher school

disrics, ciing concerns ranging rom airness o eedback. Te main ndings

rom his sudy include he ollowing:

eachers were mos posiive abou he opporuniy o se heir own goals and

work oward hem

eachers assered ha evaluaion reorm was necessary

eachers preerred creaing heir own evaluaion sysem raher han having one

imposed on hem

eachers expressed mixed views abou wheher he disrics eacher evaluaion

program is air

eachers expressed mixed views abou wheher he evaluaion program is objecive

eachers wih he highes perormance raing based on he new evaluaion sys-

em ended o express posiive or neural opinions abou he program


9/52


eachers wih he lowes perormance raing were more likely o express nega-

ive opinions abou he eacher evaluaion program

Te sudy also ound ha a large majoriy o eachers said he eacher-evaluaion

program did no generally aec heir pedagogy bu ha many said i did aec

heir planning and overall approach o eaching. Te mos consisenly reporedimpacs o he evaluaion program were relaed o is goal-seting componen and,

in paricular, he use o suden perormance daa in he goals.

Tere is much less repored impac relaed o eedback on insrucional pracice.

eachers did no repor changing heir insrucional pracices as a resul o evalu-

aions. In general eachers noed ha hey did no receive argeed eedback, more

observaions, or suggesions on how o each dierenly hrough he program.

eachers wih lower perormance raings were more likely o say ha he evalu-

aion program aeced heir insrucion. Tey were also more likely o say ha iaeced heir approach o planning and preparaion.

Tese ndings poin o he ollowing policy and pracice recommendaions:5

Hold teachers accountable for student performance. Holding eachers accoun-

able or growh in suden perormance, wih real consequences or achieving or

ailing o achieve heir suden perormance goals, seemed o produce demon-

srable changes in eacher behavior. Policymakers have in many cases made

suden perormance a cenral aspec o eacher evaluaion. Tis sudy suggess

ha weighing suden perormance heavily in eacher evaluaion and speciying

real consequences ied o how sudens achieve on perormance measures ocuses

eachers atenion on hese oucomes.

Include goal setting i n teacher evaluation. Te eacher-evaluaion programs

repored impac on eacher pracice was achieved almos enirely hrough he

goal-seting porion o his reorm. eachers said ha seting goals generally made

heir eaching more coheren and orced hem o be more organized and mindul

o how hey used ime. Policymakers should consider goal seting as a promising

sraegy o ocus eachers on key oucomes, hus shaping heir work inside andouside he classroom.

Include teachers as partners in teacher evaluation. Te generally posiive view

o his reorm held by eachers semmed in large measure rom heir ongoing


10/52

4 Center or American Progress | Teacher s Perspectives on Eval uati on Reorm

involvemen wih he program. Tis suggess ha policymakers should consider

ways in which o cra eacher-evaluaion policy o enable eachers o join as par-

ners in heir own assessmen and improvemen. Tis seems paricularly imporan

o higher-perorming eachers.

Invest in building the capacity of administrators as instructional leaders. Teeacher-evaluaion program seemed o be much more successul in is eor o

increase eacher accounabiliy han i was in is eor o increase he insruc-

ional capabiliies o all is eachers. Bolsering he proessional learning aspec o

a eacher-evaluaion program requires increased atenion o developing he skill

and willingness o school leaders o go ino classrooms and oer high-qualiy,

ongoing eedback. I also requires ha schools srucure opporuniies or leaders

o oer such eedback. o increase he probabiliy ha eacher-evaluaion reorm

will improve eachers insrucion, policymakers should consider ways o increase

he capaciy o adminisraors o ac as insrucional leaders and provide admin-

israors wih opporuniies o exercise hese skills. Tis includes having admin-israors oer more argeed proessional developmen on ideniying eecive

insrucion and having hem coach eachers on how o develop skills in line wih

his vision. I includes puting in place srucures ha allow school leaders o ge

ino classrooms and work wih eachers on insrucional maters more requenly.

Provide opportunities for qualified teachers to exercise instructional leadership.

o dramaically inensiy he consequences o eacher-evaluaion programs,

saes and disrics may need o enlis exper eachers. Policymakers should

consider permiting individuals oher han school leaders o evaluae eachers.

Given he demands on adminisraors ime and he ac ha some eachers

possess a deep knowledge o insrucion, broadening he erm evaluaor o

include hese eachers makes sense.

Devoe more consideraion o how eacher evaluaion can bene high-

perorming eachers. In recen years policymakers have ocused on reorming

eacher evaluaion o sharpen he consequences or persisenly low-perorming

eachers. I is now ime o sar hinking more broadly abou how eacher evalu-

aion can enhance he pracice o eachers across he perormance specrum.

Maximizing he eecs o eacher-evaluaion reorm by considering he supporsand rewards ha allow middle- o high-perorming eachers o improve heir

pracice is imperaive.


11/52


Tis paper briey reviews wha is known abou eacher evaluaion and pays par-

icular atenion o ndings ha inorm curren reorms. Te paper describes in

deail he seting in which his sudy ook place and he specic eacher-evaluaion

reorm ha was he subjec o his inquiry. I also describes he mehods used o

collec and analyze daa. Finally, i deails he ndings, concluding wih a number

o specic recommendaions or policymakers.


12/52


13/52

Teacher evaluation: An over view | www.americanprogress.

Teacher evaluation: An overview

eacher-evaluaion sysems generally have wo main purposes: o provide eedback

o eachers o improve heir pracice and o ideniy underperorming eachers or

remediaion and, i necessary, dismissal.6 Evidence on he success o hese sysems

in achieving hese ends is no encouraging. Alhough cerain evaluaion sysems

improve eacher perormance, mos eachers repor ha evaluaion does litle o

improve heir eaching.7 Only 26 percen o eachers in a recen sudy by Educaion

Secor, an independen educaion policy hink ank, repored ha evaluaion was

useul and eecive.8 o underscore he poin, a recen sudy conduced in 12 large

urban disrics indicaed ha he vas majoriy o eachers received he highes evalu-aion raing possible.9 Tis is problemaic because i means ha eachers are receiv-

ing inaccurae signals abou heir perormance. Highly skilled eachers ge he signal

ha heir insrucion is no beter han ha o he grea majoriy o heir peers. Poorly

perorming eachers hink here is nohing wrong wih heir eaching. 10

Muliple acors, oen working in andem, hinder eacher evaluaion. Exernal

consrains such as vague disric sandards, poor evaluaion insrumens, overly

resricive collecive bargaining agreemens, and a lack o ime decrease evaluaors

opporuniy and inclinaion o evaluae rigorously.11 Also impeding evaluaion are

inernal consrains such as lack o evaluaor skill in assessing eachers, he absence

o high-qualiy proessional developmen or evaluaors, a school culure ha dis-

courages criical eedback and negaive evaluaion raings, and a disric culure ha

oers litle oversigh and ew incenives or adminisraors o evaluae accuraely.12

Addiionally, eacher evaluaion has ew consequences, eiher negaive or posiive.

Tis reduces he willingness o evaluaors o evaluae accuraely and horoughly,

which in urn reduces he moivaion o eachers o ake evaluaion seriously.13

wo oher ailings o eacher evaluaion have drawn paricular criicism:14

Firs, eacherevaluaion has generally ocused on eachers acions, raher han on suden learning.15

Second, he evaluaion process has ypically provided eachers wih scan eedback.16

I was agains his backdrop ha his sudy o eacher-evaluaion reorm was

underaken.


14/52


15/52

Study setting | www.americanprogress.

Study setting

Te Sudyville School Disric is a medium-sized disric in a norheasern urban

cener. More han 70 percen o Sudyvilles approximaely 20,000 sudens

receive ree- or reduced-price lunches, and ewer han 30 percen o sudens per-

orm a he expeced level on sae achievemen ess. Te disrics new eacher-

evaluaion program seeks o increase he insrucional qualiy o is approximaely

1,600 eachers. Implemened in he all o 2010, Sudyvilles evaluaion program

requires school leaders o evaluae eachers annually and provide more requen

and inormal coaching. Te disrics evaluaion program also requires ha each-ers be evaluaed based on he exen o which heir sudens mee perormance

goals ha are developed collaboraively by eachers and heir evaluaors. eachers

raings are based largely on suden perormance, bu hey are also based on

sandards-based observaions and eachers proessional conduc.

Each all he disrics eachers begin he school year by meeing wih heir evalua-

or o se a leas wo suden-perormance goals or he academic year. Each goal

is based on suden growh in key skills and knowledge relaed o he subjec or

grade augh. Elemenary eachers in grades our hrough eigh, or example, mus

creae a leas one goal based on heir sudens perormance on he sae sandard-

ized es. eachers and evaluaors mee again a he midpoin o he school year o

discuss eachers progress oward meeing heir goals. A ha ime goals may be

modied slighly i boh paries agree o he change.

Also during he all sar o he school year, disric evaluaors are required o

ideniy poenial exemplary and underperorming eachers. A he end o he aca-

demics year, eachers receive an annual summaive raingwhich can range rom

needs improvemen (1) o exemplary (5) and is based on wheher heir sudens

mee heir perormance goals as well as a subjecive assessmen by heir evalua-or. In November, however, based on heir observaions in he rs wo monhs o

he school year, evaluaors mus ideniy eachers who could poenially receive

a needs improvemen raing o 1 or an exemplary raing o 5. Tese preliminary

raings will be compared o observaions made by hird-pary evaluaors (valida-


16/52

10 Center or American Progress | Teachers Perspectives on Evaluatio n Reorm

ors) exernal o he disric. Tese rained ouside observers evaluae eachers

concurrenly bu independenly o disric evaluaors. No communicaion passes

o he exernal evaluaor regarding wheher a eacher was idenied as a poenial

high perormer or low perormer, nor do he wo observers communicae regard-

ing heir assessmen o he observed lesson. In his way, he hird-pary evaluaors

provide an imparial assessmen o he highes- and lowes-perorming eachers.

eachers scored as exemplary (5) by boh he disric evaluaor and he exernal

evaluaor are eligible or leadership posiions. Tose eachers scored as needs

improvemen (1) by inernal and exernal evaluaors receive inensive suppor and

could be dismissed prior o he end o he school year i hey ail o improve.

Te new eacher-evaluaion program depars rom he disrics prior sysem inis incorporaion o suden achievemen, is eor o increase he qualiy and

requency o inormal eedback, and is clear posiive and negaive consequences

or eachers who perorm very well or very poorly. Te disrics new-eacher

evaluaion program has led o an upick in eacher deparures or perormance

Example 1: High school media arts teacher. Students in arts and technology classes

often develop portfolios of work showcasing their mastery of various skills. A media

arts teacher might therefore set one goal of having 90 percent of his or her students

complete a portfolio. For the second goal the teacher might use the district s 21st

century skills standards and assessments and establish that 90 percent of students

should advance one performance level from their fall baseline score on the rubric of

essential skills in the strand of communication and collaboration by the end of the

school year.

Example 2: Elementary teacher. In the elementary grades administering the state

test, it is possible to set performance goals that measure student growth on the test.

But since these test results arent published until July, many teachers use district

assessments, which are based on the state test, to set their goals. In the fall teachers

in tested grades administer pre-tests to their students and then set goals. A teachercould, for example, set a goal of moving students average score on the state English

language arts standardized test from 50 percent to 70 percent correct over the

course of the academic year.

Examples of goal setting


17/52

Study setting | www.americanprogress.o

reasons. In he summer o 2011 Sudyville noied 34 eacherso which 16 were

enuredha hey would be dismissed/nonrenewed based on heir evaluaion

raings. Tis represened approximaely 1.3 percen o enured eachers and 2.8

percen o nonenured eachers in he disric. All 34 eachers chose o leave he

sysem volunarily prior o he iniiaion o ormal dismissal proceedings.


18/52


19/52

Study methodology | www.americanprogress.o

Study methodology

Tis paper presens ndings based on eachers views o he evaluaion reorm and

he exen o which hey repor ha i has changed how hey each. Tis inquiry

was guided by he ollowing quesions:

How do eachers view he eacher-evaluaion program?

Do eachers views vary by perormance level?

Has he eacher-evaluaion program inuenced how eachers each? I so, how?

Does he eacher-evaluaion programs inuence vary by eacher perormance level?

o undersand how eachers respond o being evaluaed based on heir sudens

perormance, an inerview-based sudy was conduced wihin he Sudyville

School Disric17a disric ha has received naional atenion or is eacher-

evaluaion reorm.

Study sample

o gain insigh ino how eachers respond o he disrics eacher-evaluaion

program, in-deph, semisrucured inerviews were conduced wih a sample o 92

paricipans: 10 principals, 10 assisan principals, and 72 eachers. A purposive

sample o 10 schools was seleced. Hal were schools where eachers repored he

mos posiive assessmen o he disrics eacher-evaluaion program based on dis-

ric surveys conduced in 2011, and hal were schools where eachers, on average,

repored he mos negaive assessmen o he evaluaion program. Four sampleschools were high schools and six were K-8 schools. Inerviews were conduced

wih he principal, he assisan principal, and wih 20 percen o 25 percen o he

schools eachers. In building he eacher sample, eachers were seleced based on

years o eaching experience and by subjec area and grade level augh in order o


20/52


maximize eacher-raing variaion. Te sample included boh enured and nonen-

ured eachers.18 School adminisraors were inerviewed o provide daa ha was

used o riangulae eacher repors.

Data sources

In-person, semisrucured inerviews were conduced wih 92 paricipans during

he 20112012 school year, he second year o he disrics eacher-evaluaion

program. Inerviews were 45 minues o 60 minues long and were audio-recorded

and hen ranscribed. eachers were asked a series o quesions, including wheher

he evaluaion program had alered heir pedagogy, i hey el pressured o raise

suden es scores, and abou he ime hey spen on planning and preparaion.

Inerviews wih school leaders provided an opporuniy o riangulae daa.

Paricipans were also asked wheher or no hey winessed changes in eachers

insrucion, planning and preparaion, and collaboraion.

Te inerview ranscrips were coded using open, axial, and selecive coding in

order o analyze he daa.19 Temaic summaries, caegorical marices, and ana-

lyical memos cross-case analysis were used o ideniy emerging hemes across

paricipan experiences.20


21/52

Study indings | www.americanprogress.o

Study findings

On he whole, eachers have a generally posiive view o Sudyvilles eacher-evalu-

aion program bu repor ha i has no aeced heir insrucional pracice. A he

same ime hey say ha i has changed how hey plan and prepare o each heir

sudens and how hey progress hrough he curriculum. eachers raed lower

under he evaluaion program were more likely han hose raed higher o express

negaive views o he program, bu hey were also more likely o repor ha he

program changed he way hey each and plan.

Te nex secions o his repor describe eachers general views o he evalua-

ion program and heir specic perspecives regarding is airness and objeciviy.

Addiionally, i describes he impac ha eachers repored he evaluaion pro-

gram having on heir insrucion and heir broader pracices such as planning or

he shor and long erm.

How teachers view the evaluation program

o gaher eachers views on he disrics eacher evaluaion program, hey were

asked o commen generally on he reorm and specically on is airness and

objeciviy. Alhough mos eachers in he sample said hey welcomed he new

evaluaion program, he sample was spli as o wheher i was air or objecive.

eachers generally suppored he new evaluaion program, wih more han hal o

he eachers explicily saing ha hey had a posiive view o he sysem. When

asked her rs impression o he evaluaion program, one eacher replied, Tank

goodness. She explained ha he prior evaluaion sysem was poorly adminis-

ered, noing ha he rubrics and explici expecaions o he disrics new evalu-aion program were a grea improvemen. Said anoher eacher: I love iIs he

way o go. Oher eachers described he new evaluaion program, wih is assess-

men o eachers based on progress oward goals and more convenional observa-

ions, as much more comprehensive and more horough han he prior sysem.


22/52


O hose eachers who did no express a consisenly posiive view o he evalu-

aion program, hal voiced a uniormly negaive view and hal expressed a mixed

view, ciing some benes and some drawbacks o he reorm. One eacher whose

view was alogeher negaive explained: I hink is errible ha hey rae each-

ers You sar being viewed as a number insead o as a person. eachers wih

mixed views included one eacher who said ha he evaluaion program made heranxious. I kind o always eel like Im on he deense and I have o proec mysel,

she said. Bu she also said he evaluaion process has a on o benes.

Overall, abou hree-quarers o he eacher sample said ha hey would recom-

mend he disrics new program as an evaluaion sysem o oher disrics. On

he oher hand, one-quarer explicily said ha hey would no recommend his

model or adopion elsewhere.

What teachers say are the most positive elements of theevaluation program

eachers idenied several aspecs o he evaluaion program as paricularly valu-

able. Tese included, in order o prevalence, is emphasis on eacher-seleced goals

based on growh in suden perormance measures; inclusion o more daa poins

on eacher perormance han in he prior evaluaion sysem; increased accoun-

abiliy or eachers; saeguards agains capricious reamen o eachers; and he

programs saus as a homegrown reorm as opposed o a sae-mandaed change.

Almos all o he eachers said hey appreciaed he emphasis ha he disrics

evaluaion program placed on eacher goals. Te opporuniy or eachers o

creae goals based on suden perormance and heir own proessional needs was

imporan o hem. Tis gave eachers some auhorship over he evaluaion pro-

cess, and hey valued his aspec o he sysem above all ohers. One eacher called

his aspec o he program empowering. Anoher eacher concurred, saying, I

eel like I have more conrolI ge o pick my own goals. Ta wasn he case

wih he previous ieraion o he evaluaion program, he eacher explained: You

would be doing your hing and hen you wouldn know unil he end o he year

wheher or no youre good or bad.

eachers also said ha hey paricularly valued he opporuniy o develop heir

own goals given ha serious consequences were atached o hem. eachers el

ha heir inpu on goals helped mainain airness in he new evaluaion sysem. As


23/52


one eacher said, One o he nice hings [abou he evaluaion program] is ha

you ge o help creae your goals, so maybe or a class has very disrupive hen

you have o pick an appropriae goal.

eachers said hey valued he goal-seting aspec o he eacher-evaluaion pro-

gram because i emphasizes no jus suden achievemen, bu also proessionalgrowh. One kindergaren eacher said, We make he wo goals or he kids in

mah and in lieracy and hen we se a goal or ourselvesa personal goal or a

proessional goal. I like he idea o saying, [W]ha could I achieve his year?

Anoher eacher agreed: I like how we have o se our own goals, especially he

proessional goals because every year Ive always ried o selec a goal or mysel

anyway, and now I ge credi or i. You ge rewarded or rying o grow as a

proessional.

Te second major bene o he eacher-evaluaion program, according o each-

ers, is is inclusion o muliple daa poins. Tey assered ha he program akesmore aspecs o eachers work ino accoun han he prior sysem. eachers

appreciaed he ac ha he new evaluaion program, in one eachers words, is

no jus one snapsho o a eachers perormance. Insead, she explained, Is

hroughou he year. And hen, i ollows up wih daa he nex year. So, is more

o he whole picure o who he eacher is raher han a small snapsho.

Many eachers idenied increased accounabiliy as anoher posiive aspec o

he evaluaion program. All sudy paricipans said ha eachers should be held

accounable. One eacher saed ha eacher evaluaion is a mirror ha orces

eachers o conron heir own pracices and eeciveness. She added ha she

valued he ac ha you can run rom his. Oher eachers wen a sep urher,

saing ha hey explicily valued he ac ha poorly perorming eachers had

been dismissed under he disrics new eacher evaluaion program. One eacher

pu i like his: I somebody is no eeciveyou need o have a way o being able

o ge rid o hem o keep good eachers. Anoher eacher voiced a similar seni-

men abou he program, saying, An adminisraor can ge rid o a eacher ha is

no doing heir job and I like i or ha. I opens up ha door bu wih checks and

balances so ha i is no a personaliy hing where an adminisraor jus doesn

like someone. Some eachers saw he abiliy o ge rid o eachers ha arendoing heir job as he primary bene o he eacher-evaluaion program.

eachers also appreciaed he saeguards pu in place under he evaluaion

program. One srengh o he sysem, hey noed, was is reliance on exernal


24/52


validaors, paricularly in he case o low-raed eachers a risk o losing heir jobs.

eachers el ha eachers whose jobs were on he line deserved o have he evalu-

aors assessmen o heir insrucion veried by an exernal, imparial observer.

eachers also recognized he use o suden perormance growh, raher han he

percenage o sudens ataining a benchmark wih no consideraion o heir sar-ing poin, as a key aspec o he evaluaion sysem ha made i airer o eachers.

Sudens in he Sudyville disric perorm, on average, well below he sae mean on

sandardized ess. Te ac ha he new program evaluaed eachers based on heir

sudens growh made he eachers eel ha he evaluaion ook heir conex ino

accoun and ha achieving heir suden perormance goals was atainable.

Some eachers urher appreciaed he ac ha he eacher-evaluaion program

made he expecaions or perormance more explici han did he previous sys-

em. Te expliciness o he expecaionsknowing wha suden-growh bench-

marks had o be reached, or examplewas no only seen as saeguarding againscapricious reamen o eachers via he evaluaion program, bu also as inorming

eachers day-o-day insrucion. One eacher said, Tere is a rubric ha you can

ollow and should be ollowing in erms o wha expecaions are. So I hink has

more clearly saed. eachers appreciaed knowing where heir perormance

sood, boh hrough he goal-seting meeings and also hrough heir own racking

o suden growh.

Finally, eachers voiced pragmaic moivaions or supporing his reorm. Wih

evaluaion a he cener o educaion reorm eors naionally and saewide,

eachers said ha hey waned o creae heir own sysem raher han have one

imposed on hem rom ouside he disric. Tey appreciaed he ac ha heir

eacher-evaluaion program is homegrown and ha eachers played a pivoal role

in is developmen. I know is happening all over he counry. I mean his is he

way hings are going, commened one eacher. Tere was broad acknowledge-

men or he need o have some accounabiliy. Bu he consensus was ha

developing an evaluaion sysem in-disric wih eacher inpu was preerable o a

sae-mandaed sysem. One eacher said ha he Sudyville disrics sysem was

beter han wha he governor is suggesing, reerring o a proposal ha each-

ers be evaluaed solely on heir sudens es scores wih no eacher goal setingincluded. Te same eacher said he disrics eacher-evaluaion program is a

much beter opion because i involves conversaion. Is collaboraive. Anoher

eacher voiced a similar senimen: Is beter or us o be in charge o our own

evaluaion raher han leting he sae do i.


25/52


What teachers say are the most negative elements of the

evaluation program

eachers also noed several negaive elemens o he disrics revised evaluaion

sysem, which are discussed below in order o prevalence. Te primary negaive

repored was he percepion shared by a subsanial number o eachers ha heevaluaion sysem increased he power o school leaders. Tere were several aces

o his criicism.

eachers voiced he greaes concern abou wha hey saw as he increased abil-

iy o school leaders o re eachers. Tis percepion was shaped no only by he

srucural changes o eacher evaluaion embedded in he new evaluaion program

bu also by he consequences ha he disric atached o he programs eacher

raings. eachers noed in paricular he ac ha 34 eachers were recommended

or dismissal/nonrenewal aer he rs year o he evaluaion programs imple-

menaion. Moreover, eachers repored winessing increased inervenions orheir colleagues who had received low raings.

Tus, while eachers appreciaed ha more eachers had been idenied as low

perorming and ruly underperorming eachers had been dismissed under he

evaluaion program, hey also repored being alarmed when eachers hey per-

ceived o be relaively skilled received low raings or were dismissed. eachers,

even hose wih high raings, voiced concerns abou adminisraors power o

inuence heir evaluaion raings. Despie he ac ha here were saeguards

(mos noably, he exernal validaors) agains adminisraors using he evaluaion

process o unairly arge eachers, some eachers could no shake he ear ha

hese proecions migh no be sufcien.

All schools in he sample had eachers who received needs improvemen (1)

raings, and in some o hese cases he eachers were dismissed. A sizeable minor-

iy believed ha in some cases good eachers received Needs Improvemen (1)

raings. In he words o one eacher, i scared a lo o people. Anoher eacher pu

i his way:

[W]eve seen and heard abou some people who said ha hey were raed 1. Allo a sudden, hey disappear. Tey go o anoher disric. Teyre goten rid o or

hey reire earlySo is a litle scary and i suddenly makes me eel like being

enured, i means nohing...I worked so hard o ge enured and now I eel like

ha means absoluely nohing.


26/52


Some eachers repored having ineracions wih school leaders ha promped hem

o worry ha hose leaders migh use evaluaion o arge eachers hey disliked. One

eacher recouned hearing an adminisraor say he ollowing: I used o ake us

abou hree or our years o ge rid o a eacher, now we can ge rid someone in abou

hree monhs. I jus made my job a lo easier. Oher eachers argued ha some

adminisraors used he evaluaion program as a punishmen ool.

A number o eachers ook care o poin ou ha some evaluaors were supporive,

bu hey implied ha ohers were no. Some eachers used he word human o

describe heir own evaluaor. By human hey mean ha he evaluaor lisened

o hem and was willing o compromise or cede o a eachers poin i i was sup-

pored by ample evidence. Tey said ha oher eachers were no so orunae o

have sympaheic evaluaors.

Given he increased sakes or eachers, hey voiced a concern abou program

consisency, wih dieren leaders conducing he eacher evaluaion dierenlyand assessing eachers wih varying levels o rigor. eachers oen said ha he

principal and assisan principal(s) in heir schools diered in he rigor wih which

hey raed eachers and he airness wih which hey carried ou he process. Tey

also said ha discussions wih colleagues eaching a oher schools in he disric

suggesed ha here were inconsisencies in how he process was carried ou

across dieren setings.

One eacher described especially sark discrepancies beween he wo adminisra-

ors in her building. She said one o hem does a anasic job abou lierally si-

ing down and going hrough your goals wih you, adding ha here is real eor

o guide and suppor. And hen he oher onejus gives everybody 1s and 2s.

Elaboraing, she said he assignmen o evaluaors dicaes wheher you eel he

process is wonderul or wheher you eel he process is awul.

In he rs year o he disrics evaluaion program, anoher eacher noed, Te

common denominaor o he enire hing was ha neiher he eachers nor he

adminisraors knew wha was going on because i was brand new. Oher eachers

concurred. Said a union seward:

Nobody had any idea wha he goals are really supposed o be, how deail-

oriened heyre supposed o be, how big a group youre going o measure, how

deeply youre going o measure. So was i quaniaive, qualiaive? Where are we


27/52


going wih his? And everybody jus kind o was guessing and heyre guessing all

across he school sysem.

Inconsisencies presen in he rs year had no been cleared up by he second

year, according o eachers. I sill don hink ha here is a uniorm approach,

one eacher said. Anoher saed, I was alking o colleagues ha I go o gradschool wih rom oher schools and heir sysem o doing hings was oally dier-

en han ours.

Relaed o eachers percepions ha he program increased he sakes or hem

while being inconsisenly implemened, hey repored ha he program had

caused hem subsanial anxiey, especially in he rs year. eachers said ha once

hey wen hrough he process heir anxiey decreased. Recalling he rs year o

he evaluaion program, one eacher pu i his way:

I el like i was an added burden. I made me very anxious, because, beorewe acually saw he documens, i was all rumors o wha i was and we didn

really know wha i was. And slowly, i became less nerve-wracking, bu las year

[2010] was deniely a nerve-wracking disracion.

Even in he programs second year, some eachers sill repored having hese

eelings. As one eacher said, [Te evaluaion program] is really sressul or me

because I eel like I already jumped hrough hoops when I did [he sae-mandaed

cericaion] porolio. And now I eel like his is jus anoher added sressor in

some ways. A ew eachers repored being earul o asking adminisraors or

help. One eacher said, When I alk o adminisraors I always worry like his is

somehing has going o aec my EP (evaluaion). Lasly, a ew eachers el

hey could no each as creaively because hey el heir sudens would no obain

he skills necessary o perorm well on sandardized assessmens embedded in he

eachers goals, hereby prevening hese eachers rom obaining heir goals.


28/52


How teachers ratings affect their views

Tere were disinc dierences beween higher- and lower-raed eachers views o

he eacher-evaluaion program. eachers wih raings o needs improvemen (1)

were more likely o have a negaive view o he program han eachers wih higher

raings. Tey were also more likely o say ha hey would no recommend hemodel o oher school disrics. By conras, eachers wih high raingssrong

(4) and exemplary (5)were more likely o have a posiive overall view o he

evaluaion program. Bu even a ew eachers raed as 5 saed ha hey would no

recommend he disrics eacher-evaluaion program or adopion elsewhere.

One such eacher, when asked i she would recommend he evaluaion program o

oher disrics, said:

No, no he way i is now. I hink is oo es based and I hink is very unair

in our ciy schools wih large porions o sudens ha are already behind grade

level. And I know ha heyll say, Oh, were looking a growh hen. Bu hereare a whole lo o acors ha can be aken ino accoun or sudens growh.

And he only one heyre considering is eachers. Tas he only acor.

Anoher highly raed eacher said ha he evaluaion program had a negaive eec

on her colleagues. She said, Te ac ha people are labeled a number is no really

healhy. She urher explained, Somebodys been eeling badly abou hemselves

because heyre a 2 and hey kind o lose sigh o he goal in he whole process.

In erms o specic srenghs o he eacher-evaluaion program, i is no surprising

ha eachers who were raed as srong (4) or exemplary (5) were more likely o

say ha he program afrmed hem. One eacher who was raed as exemplary (5)

las year said, I el very honored and i was really nice and very graiying. Said a

eacher who received a 4+ raing: Is a condence-builder o be acknowledged.

eachers wih he lowes scores were mos likely o ideniy he inclusion o

exernal validaors as a key srengh o he evaluaion model. One eacher who

had received a 1 raing iniially rom he adminisraor and hen received a higher

score because o he hird-pary evaluaors assessmen expressed ha he evalua-

ion program has a lo o poenial largely because i akes ou he subjeciviyo eacher evaluaion. Anoher eacher who had also received an iniial raing o

needs improvemen (1) rom a school adminisraor said ha he liked he evalua-

ion program because i removes subjeciviy. He added ha he evaluaion pro-

gram is mos eecive or 1s or 2s because he raing has go o be proven. By his


29/52


he mean ha evaluaors assessmens o eachers insrucion was required o be

veried by exernal raers. Ciing he increased consequences o evaluaion in he

disric, he believed some people have had jobs saved by he evaluaion program.

Assessing fairness and objectivity

Te quesion o he airness o he eacher-evaluaion program broke almos

evenly, wih approximaely equal numbers o eachers alling ino eiher he air or

he unair camp. Te sudy ound a similar resul or eachers percepions o he

programs objeciviy. Despie considering he same evidence, groups o eachers

analyzed he evidence dierenly and came o divergen conclusions abou he

airness and objeciviy o he program.

Perceptions about fairness

In discussing he programs airness, eachers ended o consider he evaluaion

process associaed wih he new sysem. Approximaely hal o he eachers in he

sample el ha he evaluaion program was air. eachers noed as evidence o

he sysems airness he use o exernal validaors and he ac ha he evaluaion

program is based on muliple daa poins, including a series o observaions and

he exen o which he eacher has me his or her goal. Some o he eachers who

viewed he sysem as air, however, oered qualiers. One eacher, or example,

said ha he eacher-evaluaion program was air i you do your job. Anoher

eacher said ha he sysem was air wih he righ adminisraor, suggesing ha

he degree o airness varied by implemener.

Oher eachers viewed he disrics evaluaion program as unequivocally unair.

One eacher repored ha he sysem was biased oward experienced eachers.

Anoher eacher said ha some people ge harassed by adminisraors under

he program. wo highly raed eachers said ha heir lower-raed colleagues

had no been reaed well by adminisraors. eachers noed ha adminisraors

someimes raed eachers wihou conducing adequae observaions, which hey

viewed as unair. Based on her observaions o adminisraors reamen o herlow-raed colleagues, one highly raed eacher said, Even i I ge a 5, Id sill be

paranoid in he uure abou geting a 1 or 2 someday. I worry ha is no always

air. She added, I don hink anyone should ever lose heir job because hey had

a disagreemen wih someone [an adminisraor].


30/52


Perceptions about objectivity

As wih he opic o airness, approximaely hal o he eachers in he sample

el ha he evaluaion program was objecive. When discussing he concep o

objeciviy, eachers ended o consider he exen o which heir raings were

proeced rom adminisraor bias. Some eachers who viewed he evaluaion sys-em as objecive said ha he prior sysem was enirely subjecive. According o

several eachers, he new evaluaion program, by conras, akes ou subjeciviy

by heavily weighing growh in suden achievemen and including a more explici

rubric o guide assessmens o insrucion. One eacher described he disrics

new evaluaion sysem as more eacher based I have o prove wha Im doing.

By conras, she said ha he prior sysem had no pu as much eor ino esab-

lishing objecive evaluaion crieria, meaning i was a lo easier [or he adminis-

raor] o say, Oh I like you, and hen rae he eacher highly.

Despie he inclusion o goals based on suden achievemen and observaionrubrics in eacher evaluaion, some eachers sill perceived a high degree o sub-

jeciviy wihin he program. Some eachers, or example, said ha adminisraors

sill had a high degree o laiude in raing eachers. One eacher, in describing his

overall sense o he subjecive naure o he evaluaion program, said, I you have

an evaluaor who likes you youll be ne and ge a good raing. He added ha

here is oo much room or personal opinion.

Anoher eacher disinguished beween he evaluaion process, which she hough

was air, and he specicaion o a paricular raing, which she hough was subjec-

ive: I do believe here are some subjeciviies as ar as he acual numbers, 1, 2, 3,

4, 5, bu I hink he process is prety much air. She added, When i comes o he

nal [raing], I don hink like a 1 would be a 5 or 5 would be a 1, bu I hink like

a 4 may be a 5 or 1 may be a 2. She explained, Tere are sill some hings ha he

eachers do choosehe goals. Is no like everybody has he same goals. By his

she mean ha some eachers had more rigorous goals han ohers, making i more

difcul or hem o achieve a high nal evaluaion raing.

Tis senimen was also presen among some highly raed eachers. One eacher

who received a 5 said i was possible or adminisraors o say, Okay, I likeyou. Le me udge his a litle bi and give you a higher score. She explained,

Troughou he whole hing heres sill ha wiggle room. She coninued, pro-

viding an example:


31/52


I say my goal was 20 percen and I said I me i. I don know i hey always ask

or he proo. So hen i I don have he proo, I could ell you ha IOh, I hi

i. I made my goal. And hen i hey don look a i o see i and prove i, hen

okay, I should ge a 5 because Im elling you I me everyhing. And who knows i

I really did?

Lasly, some eachers el ha he disrics eacher-evaluaion program was

enirely subjecive, reporing ha adminisraors assumpions abou eachers

colored all o heir eacher evaluaion assessmens:

I don hink heyre consisen. I hink unorunaely ha hey do have precon-

ceived noions...I mean, I hae o say i, bu I hink is human naure or people

o have preconceived noions and is so hard o unpack ha baggage, and I don

hink ha hey will always do. I don know i I could be doing heir job.


32/52



33/52

Reported inluence on teachers practice | www.americanprogress.o

Reported influence on teachers practice

eachers views o evaluaion programs are imporan, o be sure, bu wha is

more imporan is he exen o which i improves heir insrucional pracice.

eachers repored in general ha he Sudyville eacher-evaluaion program had

no changed heir pedagogy. Bu hey did say ha i had aeced heir shor- and

long-erm planning by holding hem personally accounable or suden peror-

mance hrough he evaluaion programs goal componen. Moreover, here were

imporan dierences by raing in wheher eachers repored ha he evaluaion

program had aeced heir pedagogy. eachers wih low raings (1 and 2) weremore likely o repor ha he disrics eacher-evaluaion program had aeced

heir insrucional pracices and heir broader planning and preparaion. eachers

wih higher raings (3, 4, and 5) were much less likely o repor ha he evaluaion

program had changed heir work in any capaciy.

Direct influence on instruction

Very ew o he eachers inerviewed repored ha he evaluaion program had

aeced heir insrucion in erms o changing heir pedagogical sraegies. In

responding o quesions abou he evaluaion programs impac on heir insrucion,

eachers revealed wha hey perceived as he primary eecs o he reorm. Many

idenied he primary impac o he evaluaions as increasing eacher sel-assessmen

and produciviy. Many said ha hey were already criiquing hemselves and modi-

ying heir insrucion. One highly raed eacher, or example, saed:

Im going o be he person whos mos hard on mysel. Im no going o leave ha

up o my boss. I hink, in general, eachers are like ha. I hold mysel o high

sandards, which I dene fom mysel and I wan o see kids be successul. Taswhy Im in his business.

Anoher eacher said ha he new sysem did no aec her pedagogy because I

was doing new su anyway. While anoher said, Ive always worked hard.


34/52


As eachers explained heir responses, many said ha alhough heir specic

insrucional pracices had no changed, heir broader approach o eaching had

been alered. One eacher, or insance, responded o he quesion o wheher he

evaluaion program had aeced her insrucion by saying, No ha Im aware

o, no. I mean I have gone hrough observaions beore, Ive se goals beore. She

urher explained, however, ha he new evaluaion program had changed herbroader approach o eaching by esablishing goals based on suden achievemen

as he oundaion or eacher evaluaion. I hink Im more concerned wih daa in

erms o whaever my goal is and sor o in erms o he achievemen. So i jus sor

o ocuses me, she said. I don hink i changes he acual way ha I each bu i

does keep ha as a consan ocus hroughou he year.

Broader influence on instruction

Consisen wih he above commens, mos eachers in he sample said ha heeacher-evaluaion program had broadly changed how hey approached insruc-

ion. Generally, he program seems o make suden achievemen as embedded

in eacher goals more cenral o heir hinking. As a resul, hey repor aligning

heir planning more closely o heir evaluaion program goals, alering he pacing

o insrucion o ensure sudens can hi he achievemen arges, and jetisoning

aciviies ha hey believe will no help sudens atain hese arges.

Focusing teachers work

As discussed earlier, many eachers repored ha he inclusion o suden achieve-

men goals increased heir ocus on suden achievemen in heir day-o-day each-

ing. One eacher explained ha he evaluaion program helped her o say ocused

on long-range suden perormance arges. [B]eing more ormally evaluaed has

made me more cauious o wha Im rying o doSomeimes I ge so los in he

day-o-day goals, bu [he eacher evaluaion program] kind o orces you o hink

bigger picure.

Te disric has emphasized eachers analysis o daa or several years, oeringproessional developmen on daa analysis and holding school- and disric-wide

daa days where eachers share and analyze daa ogeher. eachers repored

ha he eacher evaluaion program has amplied his eor. According o one

eacher, he evaluaion program has made all o us look a daa more and look a


35/52


i consanly, paricularly daa relaed o goal seting as a way o making sure ha

youre reaching ha goal.

Oher eachers said ha he disrics evaluaion program encouraged hem o

hink more careully abou he needs o individual sudens and wha i would ake

o suppor heir growh. One eacher explained, [A] he beginning o he yearyou really look a he kids and youll sayOkay, I wan o move hese kidsSo

I wan o ocus on hem. I individualizes my insrucion a litle more because I

know ha I have o make sure, or ry o make sure o he bes o my abiliy, ha

hese ew kids move.

Altering instructional pacing

eachers in he sudy also emphasized he evaluaion programs eec on heir

progress hrough he specied curriculum. Many eachers said ha he programmade hem increase heir eors o each conen and skills ha were embedded

in heir program goals. In many cases, his mean hey had o slow he pace o

heir insrucion o ensure ha sudens learned key conceps and skills. As one

high school eacher said, [Te evaluaion program] orced me o look a my own

eaching and slow down and hink abou whas imporan. She elaboraed, say-

ing he ollowing:

I had o slow down a lo o he curriculum in erms o coming up wih he

aciviiesTe curriculum says ha hey only wan me o spend hree days, or

example, on characerizaion, indirec characerizaion, or making inerences;

bu has no enough [ime]. So I acually know ha Im going o be evaluaed

on his. I acually have slowed i down. I creaed more workshees and games

han I normally would jus o ry o make sure ha I drive i home or he kids.

Anoher eacher, voicing a similar senimen, emphasized he consequences or

a eacher i sudens did no learn skills or conen embedded in he eachers

evaluaion goals. [I] hey [sudens] don ge he lesson, is going o come back

o haun you because hen hey can pass your nal assessmen or your goal ha

youve creaed or he end o his year. She said ha his ac encouraged her ohone in on her individual evaluaion goals. As eachers, you wan a housand

goals, she coninued, adding ha he evaluaion program orced her o really

ocus [on] hose couple o goals hroughou everyhing you do. I makes i [a]

more cohesive learning environmen.


36/52


Maximizing learning time

eachers repored ha he eacher-evaluaion program pressed hem o maximize

learning ime. Te knowledge ha hey would be evaluaed based on suden-per-

ormance growh increased he pressure eachers el o prepare ully and say rue o

he curriculum, paricularly i skills and conen relaed direcly o heir goals. On hewhole, eachers viewed his pressure o ocus on heir suden-perormance goals as

a posiive o he program. One highly raed veeran said ha he evaluaion program

spurred him o be consanly on ask in he classroom. Tis senimen was paricu-

larly pronounced among lower-raed eachers, as discussed below.

Differences by rating

Alhough he overall impac o he eacher-evaluaion program on eachers peda-

gogy was repored o be minimal, eachers who received a raing o 1 were morelikely o say ha he program aeced heir pedagogy as well as heir more general

approach o eaching. One eacher who had received a 1 said ha eedback he

received hrough he evaluaion process led him o change he way he conduced

reading groups and he way he prepared lesson plans. Anoher eacher who received

a 1 said ha he program made her more mindul o ime. She also said knowing

ha she would be evaluaed on suden perormance made her more likely o reeach

key conceps her sudens had no grasped. Oher eachers who received low raings

said i aeced how hey approached heir work. One eacher said i ges me more

organized. She added ha he program makes her plan more. Anoher eacher,

raed a 1, said, I made me more on poinI couldn slack o.

Some eachers who received lower raings said ha he evaluaion program

changed heir insrucion, bu or he worse. Tere were complains abou eeling

he wrong ype o pressure and ha he program has aken he enjoymen ou

o eaching. One eacher opined, We eel like were in a race wih no nish line.

Tis same eacher said, Someimes he adminisraors poin ou hings bu don

work wih you o improve i. And he added ha he increased ocus on suden

achievemen has le much less ime or culivaing personal connecions wih

sudens[I] miss personal ime wih kids.

eachers who received an exemplary raing (5), by conras, were more likely o

say ha he eacher-evaluaion program did no aec heir pedagogy. Insead

hey el ha i was more o an acknowledgemen o heir good work. When asked


37/52


wheher he evaluaion program aeced her insrucion, one eacher who had

been recommended as a 5, said, For me, I don hink i did. I hink i jus solidi-

ed ha I was doing wha I was supposed o be doing.

I hey cied any aec on heir work, eachers who received a srong (4) or

exemplary (5) raing said ha i made heir goals and suden perormance moreprominen in heir hinking. As one rs-grade eacher explained:

I has helped me have a more direc goal and o no be so wide ranged in every-

hing I wan o do. I mean I would love o have hese kids all day everyday o

ge everyhing in which is jus no possible. So i helps me o look awha do

hey need in order o make i o second grade; wha do I wan hem o know;

wha do hey need o be able o do in order o be ready or second gradeIm

more ocused on wha hey need in order o be successul and o move on [o

second-grade].


38/52



39/52

Limited impact on pedagogy | www.americanprogress.o

Limited impact on pedagogy

Alhough many eachers repored ha he eacher-evaluaion program aeced

he broad way hey approach eaching, mos said ha i had no direcly aeced

heir pedagogy.

Why was his he case?

Almos all eachers said hey me wih heir evaluaor o se goals and assess heir

progress owards hem, bu eachers repored ha he requency o classroomobservaions varied. Moreover, only a ew eachers repored ha hey received

helpul eedback rom heir adminisraors ollowing observaion. Les look a

boh acors in greaer deail.

Frequency of observations

According o his sample o eachers, observaions do no seem o be more

requen han prior o he implemenaion o he eacher evaluaion program.

Approximaely 60 percen o eachers in he sample said hey were observed less

under he new evaluaion sysem han under he prior sysem. Tis percepion

does no seem o sem rom eachers dening he erm observaion narrowly o

mean a ormal, scheduled observaion.

Some eachers repored ha hey were observed abou he same number o imes

as under he previous sysem. A much smaller segmen o eachers said ha hey

were no observed. One eacher said o an evaluaor, Im no observed a all. Said

anoher eacher o her adminisraor, He was rarely in my classroom and only or

very brie momens.

eachers also repored ha when adminisraors did observe heir classrooms,

hey el ha he adminisraors did no spend he ime needed o ge an accurae

sense o heir classrooms. One eacher explained, Las year, she would pop in or


40/52


jus a couple minues and no even really enough in my opinion o really gauge wha

lesson I was doing. Te eacher said i seemed as i he evaluaor was simply sop-

ping by jus o see i he kids are on ask. Tas prety much all she looked a.

Oher eachers voiced a general wish or more observaions. I wish ha hey

came in more oen. I eel like Im an okay eacher bu someimes I eel like hissysem sill allows people o ge away wih hings like he las sysem did, said one

high school eacher.

Helpfulness of feedback

In addiion o inrequen observaions, eachers repored ha he eedback hey

received rom adminisraors was o varied qualiy. Only abou hal o he eacher

sample said ha he eedback under he auspices o he eacher evaluaion pro-

gram was helpul.

One eacher oered, You don really ge eedback. I haven goten any eedback,

none in any o he schoolsI jus don know whas going on, so i gives you ha

sense o Wha are hey looking or? Wha are we doing?

Anoher eacher said ha he ocus o he evaluaion program was on holding

he required meeings o se eachers goals and analyze progress oward hem.

She said here was less emphasis and consisency in he observaion and eed-

back componen. In May, as he 20112012 school year was winding down, his

eacher said she had been observed only one ime and had no really received

eedback. She said here was no enough eedback o help her learn and assered

ha he evaluaion program mus change so ha i becomes ocused on eacher

learning and on he process raher han jus on compliance.

Oher eachers discussed a mismach beween heir subjec experise and he

experise and backgrounds o adminisraors. A sevenh- and eighh-grade mah

eacher, or example, said ha he eedback he had received was no helpul

because his adminisraor, who had experience wih primary grades, did no have a

background o evaluae his subjec area. I each algebra and pre-algebra, and shellcome in and some o he lessons migh blow her away bu i could be somehing

as simple as jus wo-sep equaion, which is very simple o me, he said, speaking

o his evaluaor. I hink ha hey need o bring in eiher an evaluaor rom he

disric or somebody ha can judge a lesson plan or ha specic specialy.


41/52

Limited impact on pedagogy | www.americanprogress.o

Overall, hen, he repored inrequency o observaion and he unevenness o

eedback may explain why ew eachers el ha he eacher evaluaion program

led o changes in heir pedagogy.


42/52

36 Center or American Progress | Report Title


43/52

Recommendations | www.americanprogress.o

Recommendations

Based on inerviews wih a purposive sample o eachers, he sudy ound ha he

Sudyville School Disrics eacher-evaluaion program is generally well regarded

by educaors in he classroom. Alhough eachers were divided abou wheher

he new sysem is air or objecive, he majoriy would recommend i wih sligh

modicaions o oher disrics. In erms o is repored eecs on eacher prac-

ice, he program seems o have had he larges impac on eacher planning and

produciviy, and i has led o changes in pedagogy or a ew eachers, mosly hose

who received very low raings.

Tus, he disrics eacher-evaluaion program seems o have spurred he grea-

es degree o change in eacher pracice hrough is goal-seting elemen. Te

observaion elemen, coupled wih coaching and eedback, does no seem o have

changed eachers pracice. Tis may be because many eachers said hey were no

observed requenly and received litle helpul eedback.

Moreover, he evaluaion programs repored impac was greaes on hose each-

ers wih he lowes evaluaion raings. Tese eachers were more likely o repor

ha he evaluaion program caused hem o change heir pedagogical pracices as

well as heir broader approach o heir work. eachers who received high raings

were much less likely o repor ha he program produced any concree changes

in heir insrucion.

Tese ndings sugges ha i is possible o spur changes in eacher pracice

by increasing individual-level eacher accounabiliy or suden achievemen

while a he same ime elevaing eacher ownership over eacher evaluaion and

insiuing saeguards o proec eachers agains biased acions on he par o

adminisraors. Tese ndings sugges he ollowing implicaions or policymak-ers and praciioners.


44/52


Hold teachers accountable for student performance

eachers were clear ha he eacher-evaluaion program would have had litle

eec on heir broader approach o heir work had here no been clear conse-

quences atached o his reorm. Te ac ha eachers were dismissed aer he

evaluaion programs rs year and he ac ha suden-perormance growh wasweighed so heavily in he new evaluaion sysem caused eachers o increase heir

ocus on his oucome. Holding eachers accounable or suden perormance,

wih real consequences atached o achieving or no achieving se goals, seemed o

produce real changes in eachers behavior. Policymakers have in many cases made

suden perormance a cenral aspec o eacher evaluaion. Tis sudy suggess

ha making suden perormance cenral o eacher evaluaion and speciying real

consequences or wheher or no eachers reach heir suden perormance goals

ocuses eachers atenion on his oucome.

Include goal setting in teacher evaluation

Te eacher-evaluaion programs impac on eacher pracice was achieved almos

enirely hrough he goal porion o his evaluaion reorm. Under he previous eval-

uaion sysem, eachers se goals, bu he sakes were higher under he new evalua-

ion program, and his led hem o ake he goals more seriously and each and plan

wih he goals in mind. eachers said ha he increased emphasis on goals generally

made heir eaching more coheren, along wih making hem more organized and

more mindul o how hey used ime. eachers already seting goals on heir own

appreciaed he ac ha his pracice was endorsed by he new evaluaion program.

Policymakers should consider goal seting as a promising sraegy o ocus eachers

on key oucomes, hus shaping heir work in and ou o he classroom.

Include teachers as partners in teacher evaluation

Te majoriy o eachers inerviewed or his sudy viewed he disrics new eacher

evaluaion program avorably. Even hose who received low raings el ha he

program was an improvemen over he disrics previous evaluaion sysem. Tegenerally posiive view held by eachers semmed in large par rom heir ongoing

involvemen wih he program. eachers valued he ac ha hey were able o se

heir own goals in consulaion wih heir adminisraor. Tis increased heir owner-

ship over he process and, especially or hose eachers who were no a risk o losing


45/52

Recommendations | www.americanprogress.o

heir jobs, made hem eel ha hey could bene rom paricipaing in he evalua-

ion program. eachers also cied he involvemen o heir colleagues as parners in

developing he reorm as a key reason or heir suppor o he iniiaive. Overall, his

suggess ha policymakers should consider ways o cra eacher-evaluaion policy

o enable eachers o join as parners in heir own assessmen and improvemen.

Tis seems paricularly imporan o higher-perorming eachers.

Invest in building the capacity of administrators as

instructional leaders

Tis sudy nds ha he eacher-evaluaion program seems o be spurring

changes o he work pracices o lower-raed eachers via he hrea o negaive

consequences and, o some exen, direc eedback rom adminisraors regard-

ing specic pedagogical changes. In shor, he evaluaion program seems much

more successul in is eor o increase eacher accounabiliy han in is eor oincrease he repored insrucional capabiliies o all is eachers. In many ways,

his is no surprise. I is much easier o insiue accounabiliy and consequences

han o make he culural and srucural changes necessary o capialize on he

eacher-evaluaion programs poenial o improve he insrucion o all eachers.

Bolsering he proessional learning aspec o he evaluaion program requires

increased atenion o developing skill, will, and opporuniy or school leaders o

ge ino heir eachers classrooms and oer high-qualiy, ongoing eedback.

Tis is much easier said han done, ye he success o he eacher-evaluaion

sysem hinges in large measure on he work and involvemen o school leaders. As

policymakers ramp up eacher-evaluaion sysems o make hem more rigorous,

he burden on school leaders in mos cases inensies dramaically. In he rush

o hold eachers accounable, oo ew policymakers sop o consider he praci-

cal implicaions o heir proposals, including he quesion o who will evaluae all

hese eachers based on muliple measures and muliple observaions.

o increase he probabiliy ha eacher-evaluaion reorm will improve eachers

insrucion, policymakers should consider ways in which o increase he capaciy

o adminisraors as insrucional leaders. Tis means ha mos, i no all, schoolleaders will need addiional proessional developmen regarding no only eec-

ive insrucional echniques in dieren subjecs and grade levels, bu also how o

deliver high-qualiy eedback and coach eachers across he perormance specrum.

I also requires ha schools srucure opporuniies or leaders o oer such eed-


46/52


back. Tis may involve aking some responsibiliies away rom school leaders and, as

discussed below, enlising addiional evaluaors o carry ou his imporan work.

Provide opportunities for qualified teachers to exercise

instructional leadership

Policymakers would be wise o consider wheher school leaders can reasonably

carry ou high-qualiy eacher evaluaion while atending o heir many oher

responsibiliies. Te answer in many cases mos likely is ha school leaders can-

no successully do all o wha is required o hem. Given his realiy, saes would

be wise o consider permiting individuals oher han school leaders o evaluae

eachers. Tese evaluaors could include reired adminisraors. Te mos promis-

ing source o addiional evaluaors, however, is maser eachers. Tese individuals

know eaching well and oen possess specic subjec-area and/or grade-level

experise ha a building principal or assisan principal may lack. o dramaicallyinensiy he consequences o eacher evaluaions, saes and disrics may need o

enlis exper eachers.

Devote more consideration to how teacher evaluation can benefit

high-performing teachers

Lasly, a clear implicaion o his sudy is ha policymakers seeking o reorm eacher

evaluaion need o devoe more consideraion o deermining how eacher evalua-

ion can bene high-perorming eachers. According o his sample, high-perorm-

ing eachers appreciaed he validaion o heir raing. Tey also repored ha he

evaluaion program ocused heir atenion on suden achievemen as embedded in

heir goals. Bu hey did no repor ha he evaluaion sysem helped hem improve

heir classroom insrucion or provided concree rewards or obaining high raings.

While hese high-perorming eachers said ha he evaluaion program was no a

burden, hey also said he program did no bene hem proessionally.

In recen years policymakers have ocused on reorming eacher evaluaion o

sharpen consequences or persisenly low-perorming eachers. I is now ime osar hinking more broadly abou how eacher evaluaion can enhance he prac-

ices and oucomes o eachers across he perormance specrum. o maximize he

eecs o eacher-evaluaion reorm, considering he suppors and rewards ha

encourage middle and high perormers o improve heir pracice is imperaive.


47/52

Conclusion | www.americanprogress.o

Conclusion

eacher-evaluaion reorm is ron and cener in he eors o improve our public

schools. Despie he magniude o he changes being enaced o eacher evalua-

ion and he consequences ied o he process, we have litle sysemaic evidence

regarding how eachers are responding o hese changes and wheher heir experi-

ences wih reorm dier by level o eacher perormance. Tis small-scale sudy

sough o provide evidence o inorm he debae among policymakers abou how

evaluaion should be changed so ha i yields he greaes impac or schools,

disric leaders, adminisraors, eachers, and, mos imporanly, sudens.


48/52


49/52

About the author | www.americanprogress.o

About the author

Morgaen L. Donaldson is an assisan proessor o educaional leadership a he

Universiy o Connecicus Neag School o Educaion and a research afliae

a he universiy s Cener or Educaion Policy Analysis. She is also a research

associae a he Projec on he Nex Generaion o eachers a Harvard Universiy.As a researcher, she sudies policies and pracices relaed o eacher qualiy,

eacher evaluaion, school and disric human-capial developmen, and eacher

unions. Her recen publicaions include Srenghening eacher Evaluaion:

Wha Disric Leaders Can Do in Educaional Leadership (2012); each or

Amrica: Te Lainizaion o U.S. Schools and he Criical Shorage o Laino/a

eachers in American Educaional Research Journal (2012); and Te Price

o Misassignmen: Te Role o eaching Assignmens in each or America

eachers Exi rom Low-Income Schools and he eaching Proession in

Educaional Evaluaion and Policy Analysis (2010). A ormer public high school

eacher, Donaldson was a ounding aculy member o he Boson Ars Academy,Bosons public high school or he ars. She also served as a projec manager in a

Gaes Foundaion-unded iniiaive o replicae he pracices o small schools ha

eecively served low-income and minoriy sudens. Donaldson holds a docor o

educaion and a maser in educaion degree rom he Harvard Graduae School o

Educaion and a bachelors degree rom Princeon Universiy.

Acknowledgements

I am mos graeul o he eachers and principals who shared heir experiences

wih me and o he disric leaders who suppored his projec and aciliaed

my access o schools and educaors. Tanks are also due o Jennier Freeman,

Alexandria Davies, and John Madura or assisance in collecing hese daa. I also

hank Glenda Paree, Kae Penningon, Adriane Dorringon, and Angela Minnici

or heir eedback on earlier dras o his repor. Te research on which his paper

is based was suppored by a gran rom he Cener or American Progress. All

errors are my own.


50/52



51/52

Endnotes | www.americanprogress.o

Endnotes

1 See, e.g., Daniel McCarey and others, Evaluatingvalue-added models or teacher accountability (SantaMonica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2003).

2 Morgaen L. Donaldson, So Long, Lake Wobegon?:Using Teacher Evaluation to Raise Teacher Quality

(Washington: Center or American Progress, 2009);Daniel Weisberg and others, The Widget Eect (NewYork: The New Teacher Project, 2009).

3 Alexander Russo, List o States Making RTTT-RelatedChanges, available at http://scholasticadministrator.ty-pepad.com/thisweekineducation/2010/06/usde-list-o-states-making-rtttrelated-changes.html (last accessedOctober 29, 2011); Liana Heitin and Sean Cavanaugh,Legislatures Approve Tougher Teacher Policies, Educa-tion Week 30 (36) (2011): 26.

4 All proper nouns in this report are pseudonyms.

5 These recommendations are not listed in any particularorder.

6 Mary Kennedy, Teacher Assessment and the Questor Teacher Quality (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010);

Linda Darling-Hammond, Arthur Wise, and Sara Pease,Teacher Evaluation in the Organizational Context:A Review o the Literature, Review o EducationalResearch, 53 (3) (1983): 285-328.

7 See Eric Taylor and John Tyler, The Eects o Evalua-tion on Perormance. Working Paper 16877 (NationalBureau o Economic Research: 2011), available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w16877.

8 Ann Duett and others, Waiting to Be Won Over(Washington: Education Sector, 2008).

9 Weisberg and others, The Widget Eect.

10 For a more in-depth discussion o how infated ratingsmight aect teacher motivation, see Donaldson, SoLong Lake Wobegon?

11 Julia Koppich and Elaine Showalter, Strategic Manage-ment o Human Capital: A Cross-Case Analysis o FiveDistricts (Madison, WI: Strategic Management oHuman Capital, 2008); Christopher Brandt and others,Examining district guidance to schools on teacherevaluation policies in the Midwest Region (Washing-

ton: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Educa-tion Sciences, National Center or Education Evaluationand Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Labora-tory Midwest, 2007); Richard Halverson and MatthewCliord, Evaluation in the Wild: A Distributed CognitionPerspective on Teacher Assessment, EducationalAdministration Quarterly, 42 (4) (2006): 578-619.

12 Steven Kimball and Anthony Milanowski, ExaminingTeacher Evaluation Validity and Leadership DecisionMaking within a Standards-Based Evaluation System,Educational Administration Quarterly, 45 (1) (2009):34-70.


14 Donaldson, So Long Lake Wobegon?

15 Kennedy, Teacher Assessment and the Quest or

Teacher Quality.


17 All proper names in this paper are pseudonyms.

18 All teachers in the sample were working in the districtat the time o the district s 2011 teacher survey.

19 Anselm Strauss and Juliet Corbin, Basics o Q ualitativeResearch (Newbury Park, Caliornia: Sage, 1990).

20 Matthew Miles and A. Michael Huberman, An Ex-panded Sourcebook (Thousand Oaks, Caliornia: Sage,1994).
http://www.nber.org/papers/w16877http://www.nber.org/papers/w16877http://www.nber.org/papers/w16877http://www.nber.org/papers/w16877


52/52

The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute

dedicated to promoting a strong, just, and free America that ensures opportunity

for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment to

these values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values.

We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and

international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that

is of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Documents

Teachers’ Perspectives on Evaluation Reform